COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

DATE: 20000505

DOCKET: C33204

RE: PAMELLA AMSTER (Plaintiff\Appellant) – and –

JUSTICE DONALD R. CAMERON (Defendant\Respondent)

BEFORE: McMURTRY C.J.O., GOUDGE AND SHARPE JJ.A.

COUNSEL: Pamella Amster, in person

For the appellant

T. Heintzman, Q.C.

C. Wayland

For the respondent

HEARD: May 3, 2000

On appeal from the order of Cunningham J. dated November 2, 1999.

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] In our view, this appeal must be dismissed. The matters

pleaded in the statement of claim involve complaints about the

acts of the defendant done in the execution of his judicial

duties when hearing and deciding the appellant’s earlier law suit

against her former common law partner.

[2] The defendant’s response to the appellant’s complaint to the

Canadian Judicial Council falls into the category of acts done in

the course of his judicial office. The complaint concerned his

conduct of the trial and he was required by virtue of his

judicial office to respond to the Canadian Judicial Council.

[3] Accordingly, even if true, the allegations in the statement

of claim do not give rise to a valid cause of action in law and

the motions judge correctly determined that the action must be

dismissed. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

“R.R. McMurtry C.J.O.”

“S.T. Goudge J.A.”

“Robert J. Sharpe J.A.”