Court File and Parties

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO DATE: 20230614 DOCKET: COA-23-CV-0194

Doherty, Hoy and Favreau JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Jaspal Samra, Amarjit Samra and Raj Karan Samra Appellants

and

His Majesty the King in Right of Ontario as represented by The Ministry of the Attorney General, John Kromkamp, Sandra Theroulde and Huguette Thomson Respondents

Counsel: Jaspal Samra, acting in person Mihaela Ion, for the respondents

Heard: in writing

On appeal from the order of Justice Sally A. Gomery of the Superior Court of Justice, dated February 3, 2023.

Reasons for Decision

[1] Following a request made by the respondents on this appeal, the Registrar issued a notice to the parties that the court was considering dismissing the appeal pursuant to r. 2.1.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, because the appeal appears on its face to be frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process. The appellant made submissions in response to the notice.

[2] Having reviewed the materials, including the appellant’s notice of appeal, factum on appeal and submissions in response to the r. 2.1.01 notice, we are persuaded that the appeal should be dismissed as frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process.

[3] The appeal arises from an order made in the Superior Court dismissing the appellant’s action for failing to comply with the notice requirements pursuant to the Proceedings Against the Crown Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.27 and, in a supplemental endorsement, on the basis that the claim is an abuse of process and does not disclose a cause of action. In the underlying action, the appellant seeks over $50 million in damages alleging that, in 2003, Court of Appeal staff prevented him from filing materials and treated him inappropriately, including with the use of racist terms. The root of the appellant’s complaints appears to arise from a judgment made against him in 1993, confirming his paternity of a son born in 1992. Since then, the appellant has been involved in other litigation, including a human rights complaint and subsequent judicial review, in which he has made ongoing allegations against numerous people involved in the paternity litigation and other litigation.

[4] The appellant’s claim, appeal materials and materials in response to the s. 2.1.01 notice are replete with conspiracy theories in relation to numerous people involved in the appellant’s prior litigation, including judges, lawyers, current and former court staff and the paternity testing lab staff. Notably, his materials do not raise any grounds of appeal in relation to the order under appeal, other than an unparticularized allegation that the motion judge was racially biased. Rather, his materials raise a broad range of grievances related to the paternity litigation and his human rights complaint.

[5] As held in Scaduto v. The Law Society of Upper Canada, 2015 ONCA 733, 343 O.A.C. 87, at para. 9, leave to appeal refused, [2015] S.C.C.A. No. 488, this court said:

[R]ule 2.1 is not for close calls. Its availability is predicated on the abusive nature of the proceeding being apparent on the face of the pleadings themselves. No evidence is submitted on the motion…. [T]here are two conditions generally required for rule 2.1 to be applied. First, the frivolous, vexatious, or abusive nature of the proceeding should be apparent on the face of the pleading as required by the rule. Second, there should generally be a basis in the pleadings to support the resort to the attenuated process of rule 2.1.

[6] This is not a close call. The appellant’s notice of appeal and factum on appeal bear all the hallmarks of an appeal that is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process. The appellant is seeking to relitigate issues already litigated and he makes spurious inflammatory allegations against a wide range of individuals who have previously been involved in his litigation: Lochner v. Ontario Civilian Police Commission, 2020 ONCA 720, at paras. 23-24. There does not appear to be any merit whatsoever to his appeal.

[7] The appeal is therefore dismissed.

“Doherty J.A.”

“Alexandra Hoy J.A.”

“L. Favreau J.A.”