CITATION: YADETA v. REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEEL POLICE SERVICES BOARD et al, 2025 ONSC 1777
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DC-24-00000059-0000
DATE: 20250321
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
Heeney, D.L. Corbett and Sheard JJ.
BETWEEN:
BANTI YADETA
Applicant
- and -
REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEEL POLICE SERVICES BOARD, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO, MAPLEHURST CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX, JANE DOE and JANE DOE
Respondents
Counsel:
Banti Yadeta, self-Represented, not appearing
G. Ferguson for the Respondent, Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board
M. Saad for the Respondents, His Majesty the King in Right of Ontario, The Attorney General of Ontario and Maplehurst Correctional Complex
HEARD: October 10, 2024
RULING
[1] This matter came on before a panel of the Divisional Court this day (October 10, 2024). Mr. Yadeta had previously requested an adjournment that had been denied by Justice Emery. He has written into the court again indicating that he was unavailable today and I think the appropriate word would be “demanding” an adjournment. Notably Mr. Yadeta did not explain why it was he was “unavailable” today. That makes it rather difficult to consider his request for an adjournment.
[2] That having been said, on a review of the matter, it appears to be the case that the order of Justice Ricchetti is an interlocutory order and, as a consequence, an appeal is not available unless leave is obtained from the Divisional Court. Leave may be obtained on motion in writing through the Toronto main office of the Divisional Court. It is apparent that this has not been done. Accordingly, this panel directs the Registrar to issue a Notice to Mr. Yadeta pursuant to Rule 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure advising Mr. Yadeta that it appears that the appeal is frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process because it has been brought without first obtaining leave to appeal.
[3] Mr. Yadeta will have twenty days to provide his written submissions in response to the Rule 2.1 Notice. Those twenty days are to run from the time the Registrar gives notice by email to Mr. Yadeta as directed by this court. Responding parties will not respond to Mr. Yadeta’s submissions unless the court directs otherwise. The Rule 2.1 issue will be addressed by Justice Corbett as a single judge of the Divisional Court pursuant to the direction of Associate Chief Justice McWatt that all such procedures under Rule 2.1 in the Divisional Court be heard and determined by a single judge of the Divisional Court. A copy of this Endorsement will be typed up and provided to Mr. Yadeta and counsel for the Respondents.
[4] Through administrative oversight, this decision was not released back in October 2024, at the time the panel made its decision. The court directs that the endorsement be sent by email to Mr Yadeta by March 26, 2025, and that any submissions Mr. Yadeta may make respecting the r. 2.1 notice be provided to the court by email by April 21, 2025.
“Heeney J.”
“D.L. Corbett J.”
“Sheard J.”
Ruling Delivered Orally: October 10, 2024
Written Endorsement Released: March 21, 2025