Gledhill v. Toronto Police Services Board, 2015 ONSC 3433

COURT FILE NO.: CV-15-521046

DATE: 20150528

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: Mark Gledhill, Plaintiff

AND:

Toronto Police Services Board et al, Defendants

BEFORE: Himel J.

COUNSEL: Mark Gledhill, Self-Represented Plaintiff

Damian Hornich, for the Defendants

HEARD: May 28, 2015

ENDORSEMENT

[1] In an endorsement dated February 13, 2015, Myers J. made an order under rule 2.1.01(3)(1) with reference to Court File No.: CV-14-516185 directing the registrar to give notice to the plaintiff in Form 2.1A that the court is considering making an order under rule 2.1.01 and stayed all proceedings. He also directed the registrar not to accept any further filings in the action except for written submissions if delivered in accordance with rule 2.1.01(3) and to serve a copy of the endorsement and a Form 2.1A notice on the plaintiff and counsel for the defendants by e-mail if he has their email addresses.

[2] Counsel for the Toronto Police Services Board and various police officers named in Action CV-15-521046 requested an order brought pursuant to rule 2.1.01(6) and (7) staying the proceedings under rule 2.1.02(1).

[3] In that the claim herein is similar to claims previously raised in Court File No.: CV-14-516185 and this claim could not possibly succeed, I made an order under rule 2.1.02(1) regarding the plaintiff’s notice of motion filed in this proceeding. I considered that the plaintiff’s underlying action is so devoid of any potential merit that I was satisfied that it is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court’s process. I deemed this is to be an appropriate case in which to invoke rule 2.1 regarding the plaintiff’s proposed proceeding in this court.

[4] As a result, I ordered that the registrar give notice to the plaintiff in Form 2.1A that the court was considering making an order under rule 2.1.01. All proceedings are stayed and the registrar was ordered not to accept any further filings except written submissions if delivered in accordance with rule 2.1.01(3). I ordered that a copy of the endorsement and a Form 2.1A notice be served on the plaintiff and counsel for the defendants by e-mail if such an address is available.

[5] Under rule 2.1.01(3), the plaintiff was invited to file written submissions within 15 days explaining why his motion should not be dismissed. The plaintiff filed written submissions on May 18, 2015. I have reviewed the plaintiff’s submissions. I am satisfied that the order dismissing the proposed motion and preventing further motions to be brought in this action under rule 2.1.02(1) and (3) should be granted. Rule 2.1 provides a method for the court to determine in a summary manner whether a proceeding should be dismissed where on its face, the motion appears to be frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of the process of the court. In my view, the pleadings filed and the submissions made by the plaintiff are repetitive and unintelligible. The motion has no chance of success. The action addresses the same issues as those in action CV-14-516185 and that action has been stayed by this court in the endorsement of Myers J. dated February 13, 2015.

[6] Rule 2.1 has been in effect since July 1, 2014. Its purpose is to grant the court authority to stay or dismiss a frivolous or vexatious proceeding or motion on its own initiative. Like s. 140 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.C.43, it is aimed at preventing an abuse of the court’s process through multiple repetitive actions or where it is obvious such actions cannot succeed or where the action is for an improper purpose, namely to harass or oppress the other parties.

[7] For these reasons, an order shall issue under rule 2.1.02(3) prohibiting the plaintiff from making further motions in this action without leave of the court. The registrar is directed to not accept any further filings from the plaintiff in this action. This endorsement is to be sent to the plaintiff and counsel for the defendants by mail under subrule 2.1.01(5) or by email if an email address is available. The defendants shall submit a draft order to the registrar for signing and entry. Approval by the plaintiff as to form and content is dispensed with. The entered order shall be served on the plaintiff by mail or email and the defendants shall file proof of service with the registrar.

[8] If the defendants seek costs, they shall file a costs outline and written submissions by June 15, 2015 and the plaintiff shall respond by June 30, 2015 in writing.

Himel J.

Date: May 28, 2015