Court File and Parties

CITATION: Ibrahim v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2015 ONSC 3912 COURT FILE NO.: CV-13-479088 DATE: 20150617

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: Samir Ibrahim, Plaintiff -and- Toronto Transit Commission, Defendant

BEFORE: F.L. Myers J.

READ: June 16 2015

COUNSEL: A. Davidson, for the defendant S. Ibrahim, the plaintiff in person

Endorsement

[1] This matter came before in open court on May 28, 2015 on a motion to strike that had been brought by the defendant. The plaintiff did not appear. The defendant’s counsel was concerned that the plaintiff may have become confused as to the date of the motion and fairly did not seek to insist on proceeding that day.

[2] Having reviewed the material however, it seemed apparent to me that on the face of the plaintiff’s statement of claim, the action appeared to be frivolous. Therefore, I directed the registrar to send the plaintiff a notice in Form 2.1A inviting him to deliver written submissions as to why his proceeding should not be dismissed for being frivolous and vexatious. In my endorsement, I indicated that a claim against the TTC for improperly refusing to approve the plaintiff for free passage on Wheel-Trans is a claim against a statutory body exercising a statutory power of decision. As such, it can only be made by way of an application for judicial review under the Judicial Review Procedure Act, RSO 1990, c.J.1

[3] In response to the notice, the plaintiff delivered a written submission in which he said that he was tricked by the defendant’s counsel into missing the date of the prior oral hearing. He relied on his statement of claim and attached copies of his correspondence with the TTC registering various complaints over the years. He also attached some unsworn documentation supporting his allegations that he is disabled and requires medication. He also provided a submission setting out his complaints as a result of having been denied Wheel-Trans eligibility. He asks the court to be sympathetic to his case in light of his disabilities and his financial condition.

[4] The penultimate paragraph of Mr. Ibrahim’s submission commences, “TTC improperly applied their criteria to disqualify me from service.” If this is true, and despite Mr. Ibrahim’s circumstances, this court has no ability to deal with the matter. When a government body is alleged to have improperly applied the criteria for decision-making, affected parties can appeal within the government system. Once all appeals are exhausted, if an affected person wants to seek relief from the court, an application for judicial review might be available before the Divisional Court. An application for judicial review is a technical and difficult proceeding to understand and to bring. If Mr. Ibrahim wishes to consider doing so, he should seek legal advice. If he cannot find a lawyer or paralegal on his own, Mr. Ibrahim may seek free legal advice on this matter from Law Help Ontario, 393 University Avenue, Room 110, Toronto, ON, M5G 1E6, Telephone: 416-628-3552.

[5] This action cannot succeed as pleaded. As such, it is fairly classified as frivolous on its face and it is therefore dismissed. Gao v. Ontario WSIB, 2014 ONSC 6497 at para. 22. The court dispenses with any requirement for the plaintiff’s approval as to form or content of the formal dismissal order.

[6] The registrar shall send a copy of this endorsement to the plaintiff and counsel for the defendant by mail or by email if it has their email addresses. The registrar shall serve the order dismissing the action on the plaintiff as required by Rule 2.1.01(5).

F.L. Myers J.

Date: June 17, 2015