Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: 16-68595 DATE: 20160912 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: MR. PETER SAGOS, Plaintiff AND ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BERMUDA, SHADE SUBAIR, ELIZABETH CHRISTOPHER, DC RYAN LERRA, COMMISSIONER MICHAEL A. DESILVA, MAGISTRATE KHAMISI TOKUMBO, JUDGE CARLISLE GREAVES, RORY FIELD and CINDY CLARK, Defendants

BEFORE: Mr. Justice Robert N. Beaudoin

HEARD: By Requisition

Endorsement

[1] This requisition was referred to me by the Registrar’s Office pursuant to rule 2.1.01(6) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, following receipt of a written request of the Defendants dated September 1, 2016. I note that the Plaintiff was copied with that request.

[2] I have reviewed the Statement of Claim wherein the Plaintiff claims damages in the amount of $300,000,000. The pleading consists of the following:

Peter Sagos was illegally arrested (kidnapped) and prosecuted with no evidence (falsified evidence). Mr. Peter Sagos was Falsely Imprisoned. Mr. Sagos was held against his will and subject to Psychological torture, Intentional Cruelty brought by the Bermuda Police Service, Bermuda Prison System, Bermuda Lawyers, judges and newspapers. Mr. Sagos was always under duress during his false imprisonment. It has taken six years to get to this point. The Bermuda Police Service was negligent, irresponsible and intentionally malice towards Mr. Sagos. Peter Sagos has suffered mentally and physically because of the Bermuda Police Service. His reputation has been destroyed with his past, present and future earnings devastated and lost.

As a result, the Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer damages.

All information (evidence) needed is at www.petersagos.ca and or www.bermudavacation.info.

[3] It is apparent on the face of the Statement of Claim that this action involves events which occurred in a foreign country and that all of the Defendants are resident there. The Superior Court of Justice here in Ontario has no apparent jurisdiction over these claims. It is apparent that this action may be frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process of the Court, and resort to rule 2.1 was appropriate.

[4] I, therefore, make the following orders:

• Pursuant to sub-rule 2.1.01(3)(1), the Registrar is directed to give notice to the Plaintiff in Form 2.1A that the Court is considering making an order under sub-rule 2.1.01 dismissing the action;
• Pending the outcome of the written hearing under Rule 2.1 or further order of the Court, the Plaintiff’s action is stayed pursuant to section 106 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C 43;
• The Registrar shall accept no further filings in this action excepting only the Plaintiff’s written submissions if delivered in accordance with sub-rule 2.1.01(3);
• In addition to the service by mail required by sub-rule 2.1.01(4), the Registrar is to serve a copy of this Endorsement and a Form 2.1A notice on the Plaintiff and counsel for the Defendant by email if it has their email addresses.

Mr. Justice Robert N. Beaudoin Date: September 12, 2016