T. Lipton

The plaintiff, claiming to represent the Kinakwii Nation, sought to stop the enforcement of a mortgage by Farm Credit Canada by asserting Indigenous rights over the mortgaged land.

The defendants sought to dismiss the action as frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process under Rule 2.1.

The plaintiff requested an urgent case conference to schedule a motion to adjourn the upcoming Rule 2.1 review and summary judgment motion, citing the need to examine the Chief Justice of Canada and the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada.

The court refused to schedule the motion, noting that Rule 2.1 reviews are not evidentiary hearings and that the plaintiff's tactics resembled 'freeman on the land' arguments.

The court stayed the plaintiff's proposed motion pending a Rule 2.1.02 review.

The third party moved to stay a third party claim on the basis of a forum selection clause in a guarantee agreement governed by German law that designated the courts of Hannover, Germany as the competent forum.

The defendants argued the claim should proceed in Ontario alongside the main action concerning breaches of warranty under a share purchase agreement.

Applying the “strong cause” test from Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence, the court held that forum selection clauses in international commercial contracts are presumptively enforceable unless exceptional circumstances justify departure.

The defendants failed to demonstrate such circumstances, as the possibility that witnesses and related litigation were located in Ontario was reasonably contemplated when the parties agreed to the clause.

The third party claim was stayed in favour of the Hannover courts.