Citation and Court Information

CITATION: Lin v. Toronto Police Services Board 2016 ONSC 6736

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 386/16

DATE: 20161027

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

DIVISIONAL COURT

RE: KATHERINE LIN v. TORONTO POLICE SERVICES BOARD and INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO

BEFORE: NORDHEIMER J.

HEARD at Toronto: written submissions

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] On September 20, 2016, I directed the Registrar, pursuant to r. 2.1.01(3) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, to give notice to Ms. Lin that the court was considering making an order dismissing her application for judicial review on the grounds that it appears to be frivolous, vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court.

[2] Ms. Lin has filed a response to this Notice consisting of an earlier letter that she sent to Sachs J., who was then the Administrative Judge for the Divisional Court in Toronto, dealing with some other Divisional Court matters.

[3] Ms. Lin has some issue, the nature of which is unclear, that apparently involves both the Vancouver Police and the Toronto Police. Ms. Lin sought some information from the Toronto Police and when that information was not provided to her satisfaction, she turned to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. The IPCO directed the Toronto Police to provide two pages of the records that Ms. Lin sought. The Toronto Police have complied with that direction.

[4] Ms. Lin now seeks judicial review of the decision not to provide her with the entire record that she sought. What those records are; how they relate to Ms. Lin; and why they would be relevant to any issue that Ms. Lin may have with the Toronto Police are only among some of the questions that arise from Ms. Lin’s material. The Notice of Application for Judicial Review is, itself, unintelligible in terms of the relief sought and, most notably, the grounds for any relief.

[5] All of this is to say that, on its face, the application for judicial review appears to be frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the process of the court. Ms. Lin’s refusal to provide any additional information or explanation, in response to the Notice, only reinforces that conclusion. In particular, there is no basis upon which I could conclude that there is even an arguable case to be made regarding the reasonableness of the IPCO’s decision regarding the information that the Toronto Police were required to provide and that which they were entitled to keep private.

[6] Consequently, I make an order under r. 2.1.01(1) dismissing Ms. Lin’s application for judicial review.

NORDHEIMER J.

DATE: October 27, 2016