COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

CITATION: Direk v. Kryshtalskyj, 2013 ONCA 14

DATE: 20130111

DOCKET: C55857

Weiler, Blair and Rouleau JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Ural Direk; Kemal Direkoglu

Plaintiffs (Appellants)

(Disabled [with Medical-Conditions)

and

Nina Kryshtalskyj, M.D., C.C.F.P.; Zellers Drug Stores Ltd. Zellers Pharmacy #223, carried on as High Park Zellers Pharmacy; John H. Wait, M.D., F.R.C.S. (C); Aberfoyle Health Centre; St. Joseph’s Health Centre - Toronto

Defendants (Respondents)

Counsel:

Ural Direk and Kemal Direkoglu, self-represented

Julie Parla, for the respondents Nina Kryshtalskyj, John H. Wait, and Aberfoyle Health Centre

Danielle Stone, for the respondent Zellers

Daniel Girlando, for the respondent St. Joseph’s Health Centre

Heard and released orally: January 7, 2013

On appeal from the order of Justice J. Patrick Moore of the Superior Court of Justice, dated July 10, 2012.

ENDORSEMENT

[1] The appellants initially sought an adjournment of their appeal – they referred to it as a “standby” - pending disposition of an International Court decision regarding a letter to that Court sent in September 2012 and pending a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on their request for a reconsideration of its dismissal of their appeal in an another action and pending the determination of certain administrative law proceedings before the Law Society of Upper Canada, the Canadian Judicial Council and a Canadian Police Forces Tribunal.

[2] We refuse this request. We see no reason why a decision on whether the statement of claim in the action under appeal should or should not be struck should be postponed at this stage.

[3] With respect to the appeal itself, we see no merit in it. Mr. Direkoglu chose to make no submissions on the merits. Mr. Direk made submissions with the assistance of an interpreter. In our view, however, the motion judge made no error in striking the amended statement of claim. We agree that the amended statement of claim contains a long list of overly broad and sweeping statements of conclusion without the necessary supporting factual foundation. The conclusary allegations assert a wide-ranging conspiracy and fraud and claims of negligence against the respondents and many other non-parties.

[4] We accept that Mr. Direk and Mr. Direkoglu may firmly believe these conclusions, but the conclusary allegations are not supported by material facts in the amended statement of claim, are not properly pleaded, and fail to disclose a cause of action against the respondents, with the exception noted by the Motion Judge concerning the hospital. Many of the allegations are simply attempts to re-litigate issues that have already been determined against the appellants in other proceedings.

[5] We also agree with the Motion Judge that the problems with the pleading cannot be cured by granting the appellants, once again, leave to amend.

[6] The appeal is therefore dismissed and the order of the Motion Judge confirmed in all respects.

[7] Costs are fixed to the respondent doctors and Aberfoyle Health Centre in the amount of $6000; to St. Joseph’s Health Centre – Toronto in the amount of $1500; and to Zellers in the amount of $1500, all inclusive of disbursements and applicable taxes.

“K.M. Weiler J.A.”

“R.A. Blair J.A.”

“Paul Rouleau J.A.”