Court of Appeal for Ontario

Date: January 28, 2019 Docket: C65601 Judges: Rouleau, van Rensburg and Benotto JJ.A.

Parties

Between

Julie Willmot Appellant

and

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, the Law Society of Upper Canada also known as the Law Society of Ontario and the City of Quinte West Respondents

Counsel

Julie Willmot, in person

Sandra Barton and Natasha Carew, for the Law Society of Ontario

Tanya Jemec, for the Attorney General of Ontario

Hearing and Appeal

Heard: January 24, 2019

On appeal from: the order of Justice W. Matheson of the Superior Court of Justice, dated May 28, 2018.

Appeal Book Endorsement

[1] The motion judge properly considered the matter on the basis of the appellant's pleading and concluded that her action on its face meets the test for dismissal under rule 2.1.01.

[2] The matter was brought to the court under r. 2.1.01(6) after the respondent Her Majesty the Queen was noted in default. The appellant asserts that the respondent Her Majesty the Queen was precluded by r. 19.02(1), after having been noted in default, from taking any further step in the action without leave, which prevented the r. 2.1.01(6) request.

[3] The motion judge was aware that the respondent Her Majesty the Queen had been noted in default. Even if we accept that leave was required, it is obvious leave would have been granted, as this is a clear case for the application of r. 2.1.01.

[4] The appeal is dismissed. We also dismiss the fresh evidence application as the fresh evidence would have no impact on the outcome.

[5] There will be no costs of the appeal.