Court of Appeal for Ontario

Citation: Vitucci v. Dimakis, 2020 ONCA 601

Date: 20200923

Docket: M51648 (C67888)

Before: Doherty, Hoy and Jamal JJ.A.

Between

William Vitucci and Cathleen Vitucci

Plaintiffs/Respondents

and

Theoktiti Dimakis

Defendant/Appellant

Counsel:

Michael J. Valente, for the moving party (respondents)

K. Dimakis, appearing on behalf of Theoktiti Dimakis

Heard: By videoconference

A motion to quash the appeal brought from the order of Justice M.J. Donohue of the Superior Court of Justice, dated December 3, 2019.

REASONS FOR DECISION

[1] The moving parties accept the appeal is properly brought in this court, but argue some of the relief claimed is not available. The moving parties may be correct, however, we see no value in addressing this issue separately on a preliminary motion before a panel. The moving parties may raise this issue as part of their response on the appeal.

[2] The security for costs motion brought by the moving parties would normally be dealt with by a single judge. The moving parties have piggybacked this motion on their unsuccessful motion to quash parts of the appeal. We will, nonetheless, address the merits of this motion.

[3] On the material, the moving parties have made out a case for security for costs under r. 61.06(1)(a). The responding party admittedly is impecunious. The appeal is from an order allowing the moving parties (plaintiffs) to discontinue their action. There is good reason to think the appeal is frivolous. Moreover, the various motions brought by the appellant in the course of the action, and the “spin off” litigation commenced by the appellant, indicate the appeal is also vexatious.

[4] We order the appellant to post security for costs in an acceptable form in the amount of $15,000. The security is to be posted within 30 days of the release of this endorsement.

[5] Success on the motions is divided. No costs.

“Doherty J.A.”

“Alexandra Hoy J.A.”

“M. Jamal J.A.”