Court File and Parties

CITATION: Noddle v. The Attorney General of Ontario et al., 2017 ONSC 4461

COURT FILE NO.: CV-16-560878

DATE: 20170721

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: DARREN ROSS NODDLE, Plaintiff

AND:

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO, TODD LEVY, THE MINISTER OF HEALTH, Defendants

BEFORE: Mr. Justice M.D. Faieta

HEARD: In writing

ENDORSEMENT

[1] These reasons follow my Endorsement dated April 12, 2017 which directed that the plaintiff be given notice that this Court is considering making an Order that dismisses this action under Rule 2.1.01. The plaintiff was given notice that he may file written notice in accordance with Rule 2.1.01(3) – specifically, within 15 days after receiving the notice.

[2] On April 18, 2017, the plaintiff brought a motion for an order that he be provided with counsel at the Ontario government’s expense. At the plaintiff’s request, Justice Stinson extended the above deadline for response as well as response from other parties be extended such that it not begin to run until 20 days after he had decided the plaintiff’s motion for funding. For reasons dated June 5, 2017, Justice Stinson dismissed the plaintiff’s request for funding.

[3] Subsequent to Justice Stinson’s decision, the plaintiff has not delivered any written submissions in response to my Endorsement dated April 12, 2017.

[4] Counsel for Dr. Todd Levy delivered submissions dated July 10, 2017, which advised me of Justice Stinson’s decisions. His submissions also revealed that the plaintiff commenced an action bearing court file number CV-16-548778 (the “548 action”) against Dr. Levy and The Ontario Ministry of Health. It alleges that Dr. Levy’s decision in June 2010 to prescribe the plaintiff with a topical medication for genital warts called “Aldara” was negligent.

[5] Dr. Levy submits that the allegations against Dr. Levy are frivolous and vexatious on their face because: (1) the Statement of Claim seeks default judgment in respect of the 548 action even though it was struck out by Justice Dunphy for reasons given June 16, 2016; (2) it is not pleading that Dr. Levy had anything to do with the proceedings to defeat the palitniff’s motion for a fee waiver and to “consolidate medical evidence”; (3) it is not pleaded that Dr. Levy has a duty to provide legal representation to the plaintiff; (4) it is not pleaded that Dr. Levy has anything to do with the World Bank or funding of pharmaceutical weapons.

[6] Dr. Levy submits that the allegations against the other defendants are frivolous and vexatious on their face because: (1) the 546 action – in respect of which the plaintiff seeks default judgment - was struck out; (2) the allegations regarding pharmaceutical weapons are ridiculous and cannot be seriously entertained; (3) the plaintiff’s motion for state funded counsel was defeated on June 5, 2017; (4) the plaintiff fails to plead a coherent cause of action against any of the defendants.

[7] Dr. Levy also submits that this action is an abuse of process because it is fully duplicative of the 548 action against Dr. Levy as: (1) they arise from the same set of facts involving the prescription of Aldara for genital warts in June 2010 resulting in alleged immune system damage; (2) the plaintiff and Dr. Levy are parties in both actions; (3) the cause of action – medical malpractice - is materially identical; (4) there are overlapping injuries claimed.

[8] Counsel for the Attorney General of Canada adopts the above submissions and submits that: (1) there are no material facts pleaded indicating any involvement by Health Canada nor the Attorney General of Canada; (2) the plaintiff has not pleaded any cause of action recognized in law.

[9] I confirm my earlier finding that the claim falls far short of meeting the requisite standard of clarity in describing the cause of action(s) and the facts which support the essential elements of the cause of action(s). In my view this claim is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process.

Mr. Justice M. D. Faieta

Date: July 21, 2017