Court File and Parties

CITATION: Hart v. Fullarton, 2021 ONSC 263

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 585/20

DATE: 20210112

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

DIVISIONAL COURT

RE: Hart v. Fullarton

BEFORE: D.L. Corbett J.

COUNSEL: Ms Hart, self-represented Moving Party / Applicant / Appellant

Steven Benmor, for the Respondent

READ at Toronto: January 12, 2021

In Writing, In Chambers

ENDORSEMENT

[1] By email dated December 16, 2020, Ms Hart advised this court that she was abandoning her purported appeal to this court pending bringing a motion in the Superior Court of Justice for leave to bring an appeal pursuant to s.140(3) of the Courts of Justice Act. This followed directions from this court alerting Ms Hart to the requirement that she seek leave pursuant to CJA s.140(3) because she has been found a vexatious litigant pursuant to CJA s.140(1). Ms Hart was also advised that any appeal from the order declaring her to be a vexatious litigant lies to the Court of Appeal and not to this court.

[2] Ms Hart has now sent a motion for leave to appeal to the Divisional Court pursuant to s.140 of the CJA. She does not appear to have copied counsel for the responding party on this communication with the Divisional Court.

[3] Subsection 140(3) of the CJA states:

Where a person against whom an order under subsection (1) has been made seeks leave to institute or continue a proceeding, the person shall do so by way of an application in the Superior Court of Justice.

[4] Ms Hart is a person against whom an order has been made under CJA s.140(1). An appeal to this court is a "proceeding" for the purposes of CJA s.140(3). To obtain leave to institute that proceeding, Ms Hart must bring an application for leave to the Superior Court of Justice.

[5] The Divisional Court does not have jurisdiction to hear an application brought under s.140(3) of the CJA. Ms Hart's request to bring such an application as a motion in this court is denied, without prejudice to any application she may bring in the Superior Court of Justice in this regard.

[6] Ms Hart is cautioned that it is improper for her to communicate with the court without copying counsel for the other side on her communication.

D.L. Corbett J.

Date: January 12, 2021