Todorovic v. Hamilton (City), 2012 ONCA 198

ENDORSEMENT

1The appellant, Ranko Todorovic, appeals four orders of superior court judges made between August 25 and September 26, 2011, namely:

(1) the order of Parayeski J. dated August 25, 2011 striking out the appellant’s Statement of Claim in an action against the City of Hamilton,

(2) the order of Parayeski J. dated August 25, 2011 striking out the appellant’s Statement of Claim in an action against the City of Hamilton, with the exception of the appellant’s soccer injury claim concerning which the appellant was given permission to file an amended Statement of Claim within 30 days,

(3) the order of Gordon J. dated September 14, 2011 dismissing the appellant’s action against the Government of Ontario, and

(4) the order of Parayeski J. dated September 26, 2011 dismissing the appellant’s action against the Government of Ontario.

2In the two actions against the City of Hamilton, the motion judge, in a single judgment applying to both actions, struck out all of the two Statements of Claim except for the portion in one Statement of Claim dealing with an alleged soccer injury sustained by the appellant in a park owned and maintained by the City. On all the claims which he struck, we agree with the reasoning and conclusions of the motion judge.

3The order of Gordon J. dismissed the appellant’s action against the Government of Ontario for disclosing no reasonable cause of action. The appellant’s action was based on allegations that the Crown failed to fund or establish additional employment assistance programs that would be satisfactory to the appellant and that the Crown failed to ensure a “competitive” job market in Ontario to a standard acceptable to the appellant so that he could obtain a job commensurate with his training and experience.

4We agree with Gordon J.’s order.

5In the second action against the Government of Ontario, the appellant sought orders that the provincial legislature enact laws to address alleged abuses of power by local Hamilton MPPs and to establish a more democratic Ontario. In our view, the motion judge was correct to conclude that these were matters outside the purview of the courts.

6The four appeals are dismissed. The respondents City of Hamilton and the Crown are entitled to their costs of the appeals fixed at $1000 and $300 respectively, inclusive of disbursements and HST.