COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: Ali v. Harris, 2026 ONCA 375 DATE: 20260526 DOCKET: COA-25-CV-1364 Copeland, Monahan and Gomery JJ.A. BETWEEN Muhammad Ali Plaintiff (Appellant) and Patricia Harris Defendant (Respondent) Muhammad Ali, acting in person Michael L. Byers and Laura Wade, for the respondent Heard and rendered orally: May 22, 2026 On appeal from the order of Justice Grant R. Dow of the Superior Court of Justice, dated August 26, 2025. REASONS FOR DECISION [ 1 ] The motion judge correctly found Muhammad Ali had no cause of action against the respondent, Patricia Harris, who was appointed by the Chartered Professional Accountants of Ontario to investigate a professional complaint against Mr. Ali. It was the Discipline Committee of the CPAO, not Ms. Harris, who revoked Mr. Ali’s designation. [ 2 ] The motion judge also correctly found that Mr. Ali’s lawsuit was a collateral attack on the Discipline Committee’s decision. Mr. Ali had the chance to challenge how Ms. Harris conducted her investigation, and to argue that she was biased against him, in the context of the Committee hearing. [ 3 ] In light of this, we find no error in the motion judge’s conclusion that the lawsuit was an abuse of process, frivolous and vexatious. He did not need to consider whether Ms. Harris’ actions were protected by statutory immunity or to direct a trial of the action. [ 4 ] Mr. Ali contends that the motion hearing was unfair because his request to adjourn was denied. The motion judge’s decision was a reasonable exercise of his discretion. The hearing date was peremptory and the motion judge determined that the matter could proceed. We reject Mr. Ali’s submissions that the motion judge was biased, unfair or unprepared or that he failed to give the appropriate assistance to Mr. Ali, a self-represented litigant. [ 5 ] The appeal is dismissed, with all-inclusive partial indemnity costs of $12,500. “J. Copeland J.A.” “P.J. Monahan J.A.” “S. Gomery J.A.”
minicounsel