Date: 19981123
Docket: A-410-95
CORAM: STONE J.A.
McDONALD J.A.
SEXTON J.A.
BETWEEN:
KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI
Appellant
(Plaintiff)
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
(Defendant)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
STONE J.A.:
[1] This an appeal from the order of Noel J. (as he then was) of June 12, 1995 striking out the appellant's Statement of Claim in its entirety. The motion was brought pursuant to former Rule 419(1)(a) which corresponds with paragraph 221(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998. The Rule in question confers a discretionary power upon the Trial Division to either make or withhold an order of this kind.
[2] The appellant commenced the action on March 31, 1995 by filing the Statement of Claim, a document of some 172 pages. The respondent's motion to strike is based primarily on the following grounds as set forth in the Notice:
| |
(a) The Plaintiff's claim is unintelligible and incomprehensible and, thus, discloses no reasonable cause of action; |
|
| |
(b) It is plain and obvious from the outlandish claims made by the Plaintiff against a seemingly endless number of parties that it is beyond doubt that there is no reasonable cause of action disclosed; |
|
| |
(c) The incomprehensibility and factual improbability of the Plaintiff's voluminous allegations make it impossible for the Defendant to produce a coherent defence to the allegations; |
|
| |
(d) The Statement of Claim does not contain any facts upon which the said voluminous allegations therein can be reasonably based. |
|
[3] We have not been persuaded from an overall examination of the Statement of Claim that the discretionary order of the Trial Division is ill founded and that it ought to be disturbed. In particular, although no written reasons were given by the Motions Judge we are not satisfied that he failed to give sufficient weight to all relevant considerations or erred in appreciating the nature of the pleading or proceeding on a wrong principle: Reza v. Canada [1994] 2 S.C.R. 394 at page 404; Proctor & Gamble Co. v. Nabisco Brands Ltd. (1985), 62 N.R. 364 (F.C.A.), per Urie J.A. at page 365.
[4] I would therefore dismiss the appeal with costs.
"A.J. Stone"
J.A.
"I agree F.J. McDonald J.A."
"I agree J.E. Sexton J.A."
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: A-410-95
| STYLE OF CAUSE: KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI |
DATE OF HEARING: TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1998
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: STONE J.A.
DATED: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1998
| APPEARANCES: Mr. Keyvan Nourhaghighi |
| For the Appellant (Plaintiff) |
For the Respondent (Defendant)
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Keyvan Nourhaghighi |
| For the Appellant (Plaintiff) |
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent (Defendant)
Email this Content