Superior Court of Justice – Ontario (Commercial List)

Court File Nos.: 31-2782032 and CV-25-00734120-0000
Date: February 28, 2025

Style of Cause

Re: In the Matter of the Bankruptcy of Eliatha Gregoriou aka Eliatha Zitella, Eliatha Zitllae

Between:

Angelo Giuseppe Zitella
Plaintiff

-and-

Bruce A. Simpson, Eliatha Gregoriou, Matthew G. Moloci, John Athanasiou, Augustine Kwok, Colleen Yamashita, Associate Justice Rappos, and Tim Braovac
Defendants

Before: Kimmel J.

Counsel:

• Mr. Angelo Giuseppe Zitella, Self-represented
• Bruce Simpson, for the Bankrupt Eliatha Gregoriou
• Matthew Moloci, for MNP Ltd., Trustee in Bankruptcy

Heard: In Writing

Endorsement

Form 2.1A and 2.1B Notices

[1] The Registrar issued Form 2.1B Notices to Angelo Zitella on January 23, 2025 in these two proceedings, to give him notice that:

a. The court is considering making an order staying or dismissing his proposed contempt motion described in a hearing request form dated December 14, 2024 in Court File No. 31-2782032 ("Contempt Motion") under Rule 2.1.02 because it appears on its face to be frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court; and

b. The court is considering making an order staying or dismissing the proceeding commenced by a statement of claim dated January 2, 2025 under court file no. CV-25-00734120-0000 (the "Fraud Action") under Rule 2.1.01 because it appears on its face to be frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court.

[2] Counsel for the Trustee in Bankruptcy of Eliatha Gregoriou, the ex-wife of Angelo Zitella, requested that the court consider dismissing the Contempt Motion and the Fraud Action under Rule 2.1.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194. On January 22, 2025, I released an endorsement in this matter (later amended to address other considerations). These Form 2.1B Notices followed that endorsement, which repeated in general terms what Mr. Zitella was advised during an appearance that day regarding the concerns that had been raised in Form 2.1A Notices, supplemented by the court's own concerns, regarding the Contempt Motion and the Fraud Action.

[3] Mr. Zitella was encouraged to address those concerns, in addition to anything else he wished to address, in his response to these Notices. Mr. Zitella was advised that he had 15 days from January 23, 2025 within which to respond.

The January 22, 2025 Endorsement Re: Rule 2.1 Notices

[4] The court's January 22, 2025 endorsement arose out of a case management conference in the bankruptcy proceeding (Court File No. 31-2782032). It was not reported. The relevant portions of that endorsement to the Rule 2.1 considerations (at paragraphs 7-17) are reproduced below for reference:

The Contempt Motion and the Fraud Action

[7] This case conference was convened at the request of Mr. Zitella by request dated December 14, 2024. The relief that Mr. Zitella indicates he is seeking in the Hearing Request Form (the "Contempt Motion") is as follows:

I'm asking Justice Kimmel for an CONTEMPT OF COURT ORDER OF COSTS AGAINST Fraudulent Committing Legal Counsel Mr Bruce A. Simpson, Fraudulent Committing Bankrupt Ms Eliatha Gregoriou, Fraudulent Committing MNP Legal Counsel Mr Matthew G. Mofoci, Fraudulent Committing former MNP Legal Counsel Ms Colleen Yamashita, Fraudulent Committing MNP Vice President Mr John Athanasiou, Fraudulent Committing MNP Trustee Mr Augustine Kwok for total $1,500,000.00 CAD.

[8] Mr. Zitella indicates the grounds for the Contempt Motion to be that:

a. false documents were filed in connection with this appeal that were not compliant with paragraph #5 of the court's December 9, 2024 scheduling endorsement; and
b. the responding record that was filed in this appeal was filed prior to the endorsement of Associate Justice Rappos made on December 16, 2024 that settled the form the October 31, 2024 order that is under appeal.

[9] In response to the court's request and direction Mr. Zitella delivered an Aide Memoire for today's hearing dated January 15, 2025. Various material was attached to that Aide Memoire, including a two page Statement of Claim that Mr. Zitella had issued in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (regular civil list) on January 2, 2025 (court file no. CV-25-00734120-0000) that is comprised solely of the following allegations (the "Fraud Action"):

TO THE DEFENDANTS: Fraudulent multi-millionaire bankrupt Ms Eliatha Gregoriou &. Fraudulent Bankrupt's Legal Counsel Mr Bruce A.Simpson & Fraudulent MNP Legal Counsel Mr. Matthew G. Moloci & Fraudulent MNP Vice President Mr John Athanasiou & fraudulent MNP Trustee Mr. Augustine Kwok & Fraudulent Former MNP legal Counsel Ms Colleen Yamashita & Fraudulent OSB Official Receiver Mr Tim B raovoc, Fraudulent Associate Justice Rappos.

A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the plaintiff. The claim made against you is set out in the following pages. Did commit under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act of Canada Section 202(1)-H, Section 205(1), Section 205(3), Section (4), Section 206 (1), Section (2). Under the Upper Canada Law Society Code of Ethics Sections Complete Rules of Professional Conduct Sections 6.3.1, Section 15.1-2A, Section 5.1-2, 3.2-7, 3.2-2.

[10] On its face, the Fraud Action appears to contain allegations that overlap with the allegations underlying the Contempt Motion.

The Rule 2.1 Requests for Stay or Dismissal

[11] Although the case conference today was convened at Mr. Zitella's request to deal with his request for an order for contempt (in other words, to schedule his Contempt Motion), the Trustee delivered two Rule 2.1 Requests for a Stay or Dismissal of each of Mr. Zitella's Contempt Motion and his Fraud Action, both dated January 21, 2025. Given the overlapping issues, these two Rule 2.1 Requests will be dealt with together.

[12] It was explained to Mr. Zitella that the court will allow this Rule 2.1 summary process to run its course before any steps may be taken in connection with the Contempt Motion or the Fraud Action. Depending on the outcome of this Rule 2.1 process there may be no need to timetable or schedule the Contempt Motion or the Fraud Action. It was explained to Mr. Zitella that this summary process will be in writing unless the court orders otherwise.

[13] Based on the material appended to the Rule 2.1 Notices, it appears that the Contempt Motion and the Fraud Action may be frivolous, vexatious, or abusive. The allegations of contempt and fraud appear on their face to be in respect of steps taken in the normal course of the proceedings and in accordance with the court's directions. The assertions of contempt and fraud are otherwise entirely bald and devoid of particulars and do not on their face disclose causes of action against each the named respondents (to the Contempt Motion) and defendants (to the Fraud Action).

[14] The court is considering dismissing or staying both the Fraud Action (asserted in the Statement of Claim issued on January 2, 2024, court file number CV-25-00734120-0000) under Rule 2.1.01 and the Contempt Motion (as contemplated by the December 14, 2024 Hearing Request Form) under Rule 2.1.02.

[15] It was explained to Mr. Zitella that the next step is that he will receive a notice from the Registrar of the court and will have the opportunity to make written submissions in response.

[16] Although the Rule 2.1 Requests for a Stay or Dismissal of the Contempt Motion and the Fraud Action are before me and have been considered, in the interests of completeness, the Trustee shall still file them with the court once they have been served on all parties. The Justices (Associate Justice Rappos and Justice Yamashita) may be served with these Rule 2.1 Notices by email delivery to the Crown Law Office-Civil at: cloc.reception@ontario.ca.

[17] Since these Rule 2.1 Requests have already been served on Mr. Zitella and the other parties whose counsel appeared today, and have been received and considered by the court, I make the following orders and directions:

a. the Registrar shall give a Form 2.1B Notice to Mr. Zitella and the other parties to advise him that the court is considering making an order:

i. under Rule 2.1.02(1) and (2) (and by incorporation, 2.1.01(3)) staying or dismissing his Contempt Motion because it appears on its face to be frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court; and

ii. under Rule 2.1.01 staying or dismissing his Fraud Action because it appears on its face to be frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court;

b. Mr. Zitella shall have 15 days from the receipt of the Rule 2.1B Notices in which to file written responding submissions (not to exceed 10 pages in length), which submissions shall be filed with the court;

c. pending the outcome of the written hearing under Rule 2.1, or further order of the court, no further steps shall be taken in furtherance of the Contempt Motion or the Fraud Action;

d. the registrar shall accept no further filings in connection with the Contempt Motion or in the proceeding under court file number CV-25-00734120-0000 from Mr. Zitella excepting only Mr. Zitella's written submissions of no more than 10 pages in length to be delivered within 15 days of receiving the Rule 2.1B Notices (per (b) above); and

e. the requirement for service on Mr. Zitella by mail under Rule 2.1 is dispensed with and the registrar shall serve a copy of this endorsement and the Rule 2.1B Notices on Mr. Zitella by email at the email address indicated in the Notices (and above) and that manner of service upon Mr. Zitella of all materials in connection with the Rule 2.1 process shall constitute good and sufficient service upon him.

Mr. Zitella's Response

[5] On January 29, 2025, Mr. Zitella wrote an email to the court with the subject line: "I will be Recording February 11/25 Appeal Trial", in which he stated, among other things, that: "And to be clear I have recorded all Case Conferences for my own Protection against you Criminals from Associate Justice Ilchenko & Associate Justice Rappos & Justice Kimmel Case Conferences."

[6] On February 5, 2025 Mr. Zitella sent an email with the subject line: "Fraudulent Justice Kimmel January 22/25 Audio" which attached an audio recording of the January 22, 2025 court hearing that he had made without the court's permission and in contravention of the caution and warning that he had received in writing and orally at the outset of that proceeding that making any recording of a court proceeding was a breach of s. 136 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43.

[7] In that February 5, 2025 email, which was copied to a long list of recipients, including (among others) the Attorney General of Ontario, the Canadian Human Rights Chief Commissioner, the Law Society and various media outlets, Mr. Zitella stated as follows:

Good Morning Ms Alsou Anissimova, Ms Debbie Stubbs, "FILING OFFICE",

(1) I'm replying to Form 2.1B CV-25-00734120-0000 + BK--22-02782032-0031.

(2) I Mr Angelo Zitella am not able to reply due to the Perjury, Discrimination, Bankruptcy Fraud, Fraud Etc being committed under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act of Canada and the Canadian Criminal Code of Canada Act by Fraudulent Justice Kimmel, Fraudulent Associate Justice Rappos, Fraudulent Former MNP Legal Counsel Justice Yamashita, Fraudulent MNP Legal Counsel Mr Matthew G. Moloci, Fraudulent Legal Counsel Mr Bruce A.Simpson, Fraudulent Multi Millionaire Bankrupt Ms Eliatha Gregoriou, Fraudulent MNP Trustee Mr Augustine Kwok, Fraudulent MNP Vice President Mr John Athanasiou, Fraudulent OSB Official Receiver Mr Tim Braovac, Fraudulent OSB office until the Metropolitan Toronto Police, Canadian Human Rights Office, and the Ontario Human Rights Office are called and are Involved in these Obvious Criminal Activities you all are COMMITTING AGAINST ME A "SELF REPRESENTED Mr Angelo Zitella".

(3) Once the Metropolitan Toronto Police & Canadian Human Rights Commission & the Ontario Human Rights Commission are called and involved in the Criminal Activities being committed against a Self Represented I will gladly provide a WRITTEN RESPONSE to "Form 2.1B CV-25-00734120-0000 + BK--22-02782032-0031".

(4) All Audio Recordings of the Bankruptcy Fraud, Fraud, Perjury and Discrimination Etc that has been committed and continues to be committed by Fraudulent Justice Kimmel, Fraudulent Associate Justice Rappos, Fraudulent Legal Counsel Mr Bruce A.Simpson, Fraudulent MNP Legal Counsel Mr Matthew G.Moloci, Fraudulent Former MNP Legal Counsel Ms Colleen Yamashita now known as Fraudulent Justice Yamashita, Fraudulent Multi Millionaire Personnel Bankrupt Ms Eliatha Gregoriou, Fraudulent MNP Vice President Mr John Athanasiou, Fraudulent MNP Trustee Mr Augustine Kwok, Fraudulent OSB Official Receiver Mr Tim Braovac, Fraudulent OSB office will be released on February 11/25 before and right after the Appeal Case to all the media in North America which includes the U.S.A us.

[8] Nothing further has been received from Mr. Zitella in response to the Form 2.1B Notices that he was sent.

Analysis and Decision under Rule 2.1

[9] To dismiss a proceeding under Rule 2.1, the frivolous, vexatious, or abusive nature of the proceeding must be apparent on its face. Moreover, there should be a basis in the pleadings to support the resort to the attenuated process: Scaduto v. The Law Society of Upper Canada, 2015 ONCA 733, paras. 8-9.

[10] In my view, both the Contempt Motion and the Fraud Action are frivolous, vexatious and abusive on their face. As I described in the January 22, 2025 endorsement (at paragraph 13):

The allegations of contempt and fraud appear on their face to be in respect of steps taken in the normal course of the proceedings and in accordance with the court's directions. The assertions of contempt and fraud are otherwise entirely bald and devoid of particulars and do not on their face disclose causes of action against each the named respondents (to the Contempt Motion) and defendants (to the Fraud Action).

[11] The allegations, to the extent that they are discernable, and the associated relief claimed are either non-justiciable or fail to disclose a reasonable cause of action or basis for relief within the meaning of the Rules: see Brown v. Lloyd's of London Insurance Market, 2015 ONCA 235, para. 6. Without belittling Mr. Zitella's concerns and suggested experiences, the pleaded allegations do not disclose actionable complaints: see Brown, at para. 10.

[12] For these and the other reasons set out in my prior endorsement, I find that the proposed Contempt Motion and Fraud Action are frivolous, vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court. They cannot succeed as they set out no recognizable causes of action, even when read generously. It is also apparent on the face of the statement of claim that it bears some of the hallmarks of the type of proceedings that Rule 2.1 is directed to: see Gao v. Ontario WSIB, 2014 ONSC 6497, paras. 18, 22.

[13] As the court stated in Gao, at para. 18:

While Rule 2.1 should be applied robustly to bring to an early end to vexatious proceedings, the matters should not [be] considered lightly or dismissively. Care should be taken to allow generously for drafting deficiencies and recognizing that there may be a core complaint which is quite properly recognized as legitimate even if the proceeding itself is frivolously brought or carried out and ought to be dismissed.

[14] I have been guided by these considerations, but cannot discern a legitimate core complaint. Mr. Zitella has made no effort to raise any facts or particularized assertions that could support the proposed Contempt Motion or the Fraud Action. Rather, what has been asserted by Mr. Zitella is rambling and uses inappropriate capitalizations. The nature of these proceedings supports the use of an attenuated process in this case.

[15] Accordingly,

a. the Fraud Action is dismissed in its entirety, as against all defendants, under Rule 2.1.01(1); and

b. an order is made under Rule 37.16 (and Rule 2.1.02) that Mr. Zitella shall be prohibited from making any further motions in the bankruptcy proceeding without leave of the court (including, but not limited to, the proposed Contempt Motion).

[16] I note an additional consideration, that further supports this result, although the determination I have made under Rule 2.1 is not dependent upon or based upon this additional consideration. That is, Mr. Zitella has already been found in the bankruptcy proceeding to be pursuing "a strategy of harassment and intimidation. …meant to harass others and force them to incur unnecessary costs. Mr. Zitella is effectively conducting a war of attrition, which he appears to take pleasure in." In light of this and other findings, Rappos A.J. found that Mr. Zitella had failed to act in good faith in the bankruptcy proceeding. That finding and the consequences of it were recently upheld by this court on appeal in a separate endorsement also dated February 28, 2025. See Re Gregoriou, 2024 ONSC 5972, paras. 50-55, aff'd Gregoriou (Re), 2025 ONSC 1342.

[17] The Registrar will send a copy of this endorsement to Mr. Zitella and counsel for the requesting parties who initiated the Form 2.1A Notices and to all other parties to the Fraud Action for whom contact information is ascertainable.

Kimmel J.
Date: February 28, 2025