SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

MARK SHAFIROVITCH

Plaintiff

-AND-

THE SCARBOROUGH HOSPITAL

Defendant

BEFORE: F.L. Myers J.

READ: December 7, 2015

endorsement

[1] This motion was referred to me by the registrar’s office pursuant to rule 2.1.01(7) following receipt of a written request of counsel for the defendant under subrule 2.1.01(6).

[2] Paragraph 2 of the statement of claim states:

On November 1, 2015, Mark Shafirovitch went to the hospital to look at the foot he injured. While at the hospital Mr. Shafirovitch had bugs thrown on his collar to force itching and what Mr. Shafirovitch calls “being frozen for an interrogation”; what is really engaging the implants the military illegally put in him to create a new way of brainwashing people and this was all done in front of or with the help of the hospital staff.

[3] Rule 2.1 provides a mechanism to weed out the clearest cases of abuse quickly and affordably. Rule 2.1.01(3) provides that “Unless the court orders otherwise, an order under subrule (1) shall be made on the basis of written submissions.” Litigants are held to written submissions in order to prevent apparently vexatious litigants from abusing the processes for submitting evidence and making oral argument. In written submissions plaintiffs are able to explain to the court the gravamen of their complaint so a judge can try to discern whether the matter is clearly frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process and whether the plaintiff appears to be one who would conduct the ordinary processes abusively. However, in the truly exceptional case (this is only the second that I have seen) there is no purpose in seeking written submissions. While there is perhaps a salutary effect to allow the litigant an opportunity to be heard, is it not disingenuous and paternalistic to invite submissions that cannot make a difference just to create an appearance of a hearing that in reality will not matter? It is not that I relish the idea of pre-judging the outcome. However, realistically, there is nothing that the plaintiff can say that could lead to this matter being allowed to proceed.

[4] At para. 39 of her decision in Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Hylton, 2010 ONCA 752, Epstein J.A. set out the following important statement of the court’s duty to \ward self-represented litigants:

However, as part of the court’s obligation to ensure that all litigants have a fair opportunity to advance their positions, the court must assist self-represented parties so they can present their cases to the best of their abilities. Linhares de Sousa J. provided a helpful list of ways to assist self-represented litigants in Kainz v. Potter (2006), 2006 20532 (ON SC), 33 R.F.L. (6th) 62 (Ont. S.C.), at para. 65:

[N]umerous Court decisions have reiterated the principle again and again, that self-represented parties are entitled to receive assistance from an adjudicator to permit them to fairly present their case on the issues in question. This may include directions on procedure, the nature of the evidence that can be presented, the calling of witnesses, the form of questioning, requests for adjournments and even the raising of substantive and evidentiary issues. [Emphasis added.]

[5] I do not read this duty however to include treating people who bring cases with no chance of success less than forthrightly. I will not be disrespectful to the plaintiff by treating him with anything less than full candour. If the plaintiff believes that the military has implanted brainwashing devices in him and that the hospital staff threw bugs on him to force itching so he could be interrogated, he needs assistance that a court cannot provide. The plaintiff may wish to consult with the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee at 1-800-518-7901.

[6] The action is dismissed without costs. I dispense with the plaintiff’s approval of the formal order as to form and content. The registrar shall send a copy of this endorsement and shall serve the formal order on the plaintiff at the address on the backsheet of the statement of claim. The registrar shall send a copy of this endorsement to counsel for the defendant by email.

________________________________ F.L. Myers, J.

Date: December 7, 2015