Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: FS-20-00014738-0000 DATE: 20220414 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: FARZANA RATAN SONIA AND: ABDUL HANNAN RATAN

BEFORE: Justice Monahan

COUNSEL: J. Singha and O. Hoque for the Applicant S. Kabir for the Respondent

HEARD: April 14, 2022

Endorsement

[1] The parties appeared before me to address issues arising from the withdrawal of Mr. Singha as counsel of record for the Applicant.

[2] As discussed in my March 25, 2022 Endorsement, certain affidavits filed by the Respondent had claimed that Mr. Singha was aware of the alleged May 2020 marriage between the Applicant and Mr. Ahmed. These were serious allegations which gave rise to a number of issues and concerns, including whether Mr. Singha had permitted his client to file affidavits which he knew to be false, and whether it was appropriate for him to continue to act for the Applicant in this matter. Today’s hearing was originally scheduled to inquire into two issues: first, whether Mr. Singha should be required to provide an affidavit of his own responding to these allegations; and second, regardless of the answer to the first issue, whether Mr. Singha could continue to act as counsel of record in this proceeding.

[3] Shortly after the release of my March 25, 2022 Endorsement, Mr. Singha indicated that he intended to file an affidavit responding to these allegations. He also indicated that he was withdrawing as counsel of record on his own motion. In a March 28, 2022 endorsement, I therefore directed that today’s hearing focus on whether there were any residual issues arising in light of these decisions taken by Mr. Singha.

[4] In the interim, Mr. Singha filed two detailed affidavits, with extensive supporting documentation, addressing the allegations made against him. At the same time, the Respondent filed an affidavit raising a number of questions with respect to the statements made by Mr. Singha in his affidavits.

[5] I note that in both his affidavits, Mr. Singha affirms categorically that he was not aware of any alleged marriage between the Applicant and Mr. Ahmed. Having reviewed the materials filed by the parties as well as having heard from Mr. Singha, I am prepared to accept his denial in this regard. In coming to this conclusion, I regard it is relevant that Mr. Singha, as an officer of the court, took the honourable course of withdrawing from the litigation himself, thereby avoiding the necessity for the court to hold a contested hearing on the matter.

[6] Given that Mr. Singha has now withdrawn from the litigation, I do not believe that it would be productive or appropriate to make further inquiries into various matters raised by the Respondent’s recent affidavit. In my view, any further investigation of these matters would distract the parties and the court from the principal issues in the litigation. Such inquiries would also add to the already considerable cost of this litigation without appreciable benefit. I therefore conclude that there are no further inquiries necessary by this court into the allegations made against Mr. Singha and the matter is now closed.

[7] Given the voluminous material already filed in this litigation, along with the nature of the allegations that have been made by the parties against each other, it will take some time for Mr. Singha to transfer the carriage of this file to Mr. Hoque. I therefore direct that the process of transferring the file from Mr. Singha to Mr. Hoque may continue until May 12, 2022. Any discussions between Mr. Singha and Mr. Hoque between now and May 12, 2022 shall be for the sole purpose of the orderly transfer of the file. Thereafter, Mr. Singha will have no further involvement with this litigation and will not discuss it with anyone, including Mr. Hoque or the Applicant, without leave of the court.

[8] I am advised that during the recent questioning of the parties, certain questions were not answered. To the extent that either party is dissatisfied with any of these refusals, they may raise the matter before me at the hearing scheduled for April 28, 2022. In addition, any evidentiary issues arising in relation to the motion scheduled for June 7, 2022 may also be addressed on April 28, 2022. The parties should identify any issues which they intend to discuss on April 28, 2022 in the written materials to be filed for that appearance.

P.J. Monahan J. Date: April 14, 2022