Superior Court of Justice - Ontario
CITATION: Raji v. Myers, 2015 ONSC 4066
COURT FILE NO.: 15-63326
DATE: 20150623
RE: Abdul Razaq Raji, Sherley Leandré, Plaintiffs (self-represented)
AND
Frederick Myers, Borden Ladner and Gervais LLP (BLG), Windsor Regional Hospital, Defendants
BEFORE: Mr. Justice Robert N. Beaudoin
HEARD: By written submissions, June 23, 2015
ENDORSEMENT
[1] By Endorsement dated April 29, 2015, I directed the Registrar to send a notice in Form 2.1 A to the Plaintiffs, in writing written submissions, as to why the Court should not dismiss this action under Rule 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, as being frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process. I have received and reviewed the responding submissions delivered by the Plaintiffs.
[2] In my earlier Endorsement, I examined the Statement of Claim advanced in this action. The Plaintiffs seek total damages of $939 million. The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants were involved in great atrocities being committed against innocent children who had been artificially produced and were being “abused in the worst ways ever recorded in human history.” They demand the immediate release of these children from the bondage of oppression, and aggression of slavery. The claim describes the Defendant, Justice Myers, as a “cancer to the Canadian judicial system” and seeks to have the matter heard by the Supreme Court of Canada. The pleading challenges the decisions made in earlier proceedings by the Honourable Madam Justice Himel, Master Ronna Brott and the Honourable Mr. Justice Whittaker. The claims appear to be collateral attacks on those decisions.
[3] Other paragraphs of the claim allege that there is a plot to fabricate lies to implicate the Plaintiff, Raji, as a Muslim terrorist and that our high profiled individuals in BLG, WRH, Canadian security agencies, outside of Canada and within the Canadian government are at the centre of this plot.
[4] The Plaintiffs also plead that there is an extremely secretive human experiment operation connected to high profiled individuals in Windsor Regional Hospital at which all individuals at the centre of the terrorist fabrication are involved.
[5] In my earlier Endorsement, I indicated to the Plaintiffs that it was apparent on the face of the Statement of Claim that this action may be frivolous, vexatious cases, and an abuse of process of the court and that resorting to rule 2.1 was appropriate.
[6] The Plaintiffs responded in their written submissions that any intention to dismiss their claims is clear proof of involvement and full participation in this human experiment operation by some people in this Court. They further allege that dismissing this matter would be a criminal offence, “which include and a clear attack on Canada and Canadians, and a direct declaration of judicial war against the Canadian Judicial System and the law, which in its face is Treason, pursuant to section 46 and extensions of the criminal code.”
[7] At paragraph 4, the Plaintiffs warn that if I refuse to act in a responsible way that will protect Canadians, then they will commence a legal action against me. They did the same thing when Justice Frederick Myers dismissed their earlier claims against Borden Ladner and Gervais LLP.
[8] They conclude their submissions with following paragraph:
- We are not stupid. This endorsement was written on 29th of April while the King Abdullah of Jordan was in the country, the same way Myers produced his dismissal on 27th of February, the week Bill Gates was in the country. Both Abdullah and Gates are involved in the so-called “maternal and newborn health initiative” which is directly connected to the artificial human reproductive operation. - All power belongs to God and peace on Fatima.
[9] It is obvious in the face of the Statement of Claim in this action that it cannot succeed, and it is therefore frivolous and vexatious. This is yet another attack against opposite counsel and against the binding decisions made in other litigation and these are typical signs of the vexatious litigant that justified resort to the expedited process of Rule 2.1.
[10] The action is therefore dismissed and the court dispenses with any requirement to obtain the Plaintiffs approval as to the form and content of the final order.
[11] The Registrar shall send a copy of this Endorsement to the Plaintiffs by regular mail to the address for service on the Statement of Claim. The Defendants shall serve a copy of the final order on the Plaintiffs by regular mail at their address for service on the Statement of Claim.
Mr. Justice Robert N. Beaudoin
Date: June 23, 2015
CITATION: Raji v. Myers, 2015 ONSC 4066
COURT FILE NO.: 15-63326
DATE: 20150623
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
RE: Abdul Raji, Sherley Leandré, Plaintiffs
AND
Frederick Myers, Borden Ladner and Gervais LLP (BLG), Windsor Regional Hospital (WRH), Defendants
BEFORE: Mr. Justice Robert N. Beaudoin
ENDORSEMENT
Beaudoin J.
Released: June 23, 2015