The plaintiff brought an action against the law firm that represented his former spouse in family law proceedings, alleging delay, distress, and dishonesty.
The defendant law firm moved to strike the statement of claim under Rule 21.
The court granted the motion, finding that the defendant owed no duty of care to the plaintiff as opposing counsel.
The court also found the action to be frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process, characterizing it as a collateral attack on prior family court and Law Society decisions.
The action was dismissed with costs awarded to the defendant on a full indemnity basis.
