COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

CITATION: Ledsham v. Air Canada Pilots Association, 2022 ONCA 550

DATE: 20220721

DOCKET: C70623

Benotto, Zarnett and Thorburn JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Anthony Ledsham

Appellant

and

Air Canada Pilots Association

Respondent

Anthony Ledsham, acting in person

Hendrik Nieuwland, for the respondent

Heard: in writing

Determination pursuant to r. 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, with respect to the appeal from the order of Justice Audrey P. Ramsay of the Superior Court of Justice, dated February 7, 2022.

REASONS FOR DECISION

[1] The appellant, as head of the respondent, represented pilots employed by Air Canada. The respondent received complaints about the appellant’s conduct so, in accordance with established practice, they proceeded to arbitration. The arbitrator found the appellant in breach of the respondent’s constitution and ordered him expelled from its membership. The expulsion order was not immediately enforceable. After alleging the appellant had engaged in further misconduct, the respondent sought to have the expulsion order enforced. The request was granted by the arbitrator. The appellant did not appeal or seek judicial review of either of these decisions.

[2] The respondent brought an application in the superior court to enforce the arbitrator’s awards. The application was granted. The application judge found that none of the limited circumstances in which a court may refuse to enforce an arbitration award were present. The appellant sought to appeal the decision of the application judge to the Divisional Court.

[3] The Divisional Court sent the appellant a notice pursuant to r. 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, outlining certain concerns and seeking submissions. The appellant failed to address the concerns and demanded a meeting with the judge. The Divisional Court determined that the appeal was on its face frivolous and vexatious, but that in any case it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

[4] The appellant subsequently appealed the application judge’s decision to this court. The Notice of Appeal seeks an order setting aside the arbitration awards; an order charging certain persons with fraud, perjury, or failing to appear; costs “spent on all actions”; and $1 million in damages. The notice submits that the appellant’s Charter rights were unjustifiably infringed and that the decisions below were based on perjury and were illegal.

[5] The Registrar sent the appellant a notice that the court was considering dismissing the appeal pursuant to r. 2.1 and requested submissions. Instead of responding, despite repeated reminders to do so, the appellant wrote to an MPP, copying the court. He confirmed that the email to the MPP serves as a response and that he does not wish to provide any additional submissions.

[6] Rule 2.1.01(1) provides that the court may dismiss a proceeding if it appears on its face to be frivolous, vexatious or otherwise an abuse of process. This appeal falls into that category. In Scaduto v. The Law Society of Upper Canada, 2015 ONCA 733 at para. 8, this court said:

The use of the rule should be limited to the clearest of cases where the abusive nature of the proceeding is apparent on the face of the pleading and there is a basis in the pleadings to support the resort to the attenuated process.

[7] The appellant has not meaningfully responded to the court’s request and is seeking relief which this court cannot give.

[8] The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent in the amount of $3,000 inclusive of disbursements and applicable taxes.

“M.L. Benotto J.A.”

“B. Zarnett J.A.”

“J.A. Thorburn J.A.”