Date: 20111019
Docket: A-343-10
Citation: 2011 FCA
289
CORAM: NADON J.A.
SHARLOW
J.A.
DAWSON J.A.
BETWEEN:
JOHN
FREDERICK CARTEN
and
KAREN AUDREY
GIBBS
Appellants
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT
OF CANADA, JEAN CHRÉTIEN,
EDDIE GOLDENBERG, SERGIO MARCHI, LLOYD
AXWORTHY, PIERRE PETTIGREW, JOHN MANLEY, BILL GRAHAM, JIM PETERSON, PAUL
MARTIN, DAVID EMERSON, TIM MURPHY, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT
OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, MICHAEL HARCOURT,
GLEN CLARK, UJJAL DOSANJH, GORDON CAMPBELL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, ALLAN
ROCK, ANNE McLELLAN, MARTIN CAUCHON, IRWIN COTLER, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BRITISH
COLUMBIA, COLIN GABLEMAN, GEOFF PLANT, WALLY OPPAL, CANADIAN JUDICIAL COUNCIL,
JEANNIE THOMAS, NORMAN SABOURIN, ANTONIO LAMER (deceased), BEVERLEY McLACHLIN,
ALLAN McEACHERN, PATRICK DOHM, DONALD BRENNER, BRYAN WILLIAMS, JEFFERY
OLIPHANT, JOHN MORDEN, JOSEPH DAIGLE, THEMIS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND
CONSULTING LTD., THE LAW SOCIETY OF
BRITISH COLUMBIA, THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA, DAVID VICKERS (deceased), ROBERT
EDWARDS (deceased, JOHN BOUCK (deceased), JAMES SHABBITS, HOWARD SKIPP, CYRIL
ROSS LANDER, RALPH HUTCHINSON (deceased), MICHAEL HALFYARD, HARRY BOYLE, SID
CLARK (deceased), ALLAN GOULD, ROBERT METZGER, BRIAN KLAVER, JOHN MAJOR, JOHN
HORN, BARBARA ROMAINE, ADELE KENT, SAL LOVECCHIO, DONALD WILKINS, ROY VICTOR
DEYELL, TIMOTHY LEADEM, WILLIAM
PEARCE, LISA SHENDROFF, ANN WILSON,
RICHARD MEYERS, GILLIAN WALLACE, MAUREEN MALONEY, BRENDA EDWARDS, STEPHEN OWEN,
DON CHIASSON, CRAIG JONES, JAMES MATTISON, McCARTHY TETRAULT L.L.P., HERMAN VAN
OMMEN, STEVE KLINE, LANG MICHENER L.L.P., THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
VICTORIA, JOHN DOE AND JANE DOE
Respondents
Dealt with in writing without appearance
of parties.
Order delivered at Ottawa, Ontario,
on October 19, 2011.
REASONS
FOR ORDER BY: NADON
J.A.
CONCURRED
IN BY:
SHARLOW J.A.
DAWSON J.A.
Date: 20111019
Docket: A-343-10
Citation: 2011 FCA 289
CORAM: NADON
J.A.
SHARLOW
J.A.
DAWSON J.A.
BETWEEN:
JOHN
FREDERICK CARTEN
and
KAREN AUDREY
GIBBS
Appellants
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, JEAN CHRÉTIEN,
EDDIE GOLDENBERG, SERGIO MARCHI, LLOYD
AXWORTHY, PIERRE PETTIGREW, JOHN MANLEY, BILL GRAHAM, JIM PETERSON, PAUL
MARTIN, DAVID EMERSON, TIM MURPHY, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT
OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, MICHAEL HARCOURT,
GLEN CLARK, UJJAL DOSANJH, GORDON CAMPBELL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, ALLAN
ROCK, ANNE McLELLAN, MARTIN CAUCHON, IRWIN COTLER, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BRITISH
COLUMBIA, COLIN GABLEMAN, GEOFF PLANT, WALLY OPPAL, CANADIAN JUDICIAL COUNCIL,
JEANNIE THOMAS, NORMAN SABOURIN, ANTONIO LAMER (deceased), BEVERLEY McLACHLIN,
ALLAN McEACHERN, PATRICK DOHM, DONALD BRENNER, BRYAN WILLIAMS, JEFFERY
OLIPHANT, JOHN MORDEN, JOSEPH DAIGLE, THEMIS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND
CONSULTING LTD., THE LAW SOCIETY OF
BRITISH COLUMBIA, THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA, DAVID VICKERS (deceased), ROBERT
EDWARDS (deceased, JOHN BOUCK (deceased), JAMES SHABBITS, HOWARD SKIPP, CYRIL
ROSS LANDER, RALPH HUTCHINSON (deceased), MICHAEL HALFYARD, HARRY BOYLE, SID
CLARK (deceased), ALLAN GOULD, ROBERT METZGER, BRIAN KLAVER, JOHN MAJOR, JOHN
HORN, BARBARA ROMAINE, ADELE KENT, SAL LOVECCHIO, DONALD WILKINS, ROY VICTOR
DEYELL, TIMOTHY LEADEM, WILLIAM
PEARCE, LISA SHENDROFF, ANN WILSON,
RICHARD MEYERS, GILLIAN WALLACE, MAUREEN MALONEY, BRENDA EDWARDS, STEPHEN OWEN,
DON CHIASSON, CRAIG JONES, JAMES MATTISON, McCARTHY TETRAULT L.L.P., HERMAN VAN
OMMEN, STEVE KLINE, LANG MICHENER L.L.P., THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
VICTORIA, JOHN DOE AND JANE DOE
Respondents
REASONS FOR ORDER
NADON J.A.
[1]
The appellants commenced an action in the Federal Court on
January 21, 2008, seeking compensatory and punitive damages against Her Majesty
the Queen in Right of Canada and against a number of other defendants alleged
to be officers, employees, agents or sub-agents of the Federal Crown.
[2]
Their
action was dismissed by Prothonotary Lafrenière on December 1, 2010. The
Prothonotary concluded that their action should be dismissed because the
Statement of Claim did not disclose a reasonable cause of action, that the
Federal Court did not have jurisdiction over the defendants, except for the
Federal Crown defendants, that the allegations made by the appellants were
scandalous, frivolous and vexatious, and that the pleadings constituted an abuse
of process.
[3]
The
appellants appealed the Prothonotary’s Order and on August 27, 2010, Gauthier
J. of the Federal Court dismissed the appeal.
[4]
On
September 27, 2010, the appellants filed a Notice of Appeal from the Judgment
of Gauthier J. Other than filing the Appeal Book in February 2011, the
appellants have taken no steps whatsoever to advance their appeal towards a
hearing.
[5]
On
February 8, 2011, Layden-Stevenson J.A. ordered the appellants to provide
security for costs to the respondents in the amount of $10,000, the amount
being payable within six months of the date of her Order. That amount remains
unpaid.
[6]
On August 23, 2011, Sexton J.A. issued a Notice of Status
Review requiring the appellants to serve and file representations stating the
reasons why their appeal should not be dismissed for delay, justifying the
delay and proposing a timetable for the completion of the steps necessary to
advance their appeal in an expeditious manner.
[7]
On September 16, 2011, the appellants filed their Written
Representations in response to the Notice of Status Review. These
representations do not, in my respectful opinion, offer any acceptable
justification for the delay in pursuing the appeal, nor do they set out a
proposed timetable for the completion of the steps necessary to advance the
appeal expeditiously. Consequently, the appellants’ Written Representations are
not in compliance with the Notice of Status Review.
[8]
That,
in itself, would be sufficient for us to dismiss the appeal. However, after
reviewing the Court file in its entirety, I must say that I am in complete
agreement with my colleague Layden-Stevenson J.A. who, in her Reasons for
granting five motions by the respondents for orders for security for costs,
indicated that the appellants’ appeal had no reasonable prospect of success and
that it was frivolous and vexatious.
[9]
Thus,
I see no basis nor justification for allowing the appellants to continue with
this appeal and, therefore, in all of the circumstances, this appeal shall be
dismissed with costs.
“M.
Nadon”
“I agree.
K.
Sharlow J.A.”
“I
agree.
Eleanor
R. Dawson J.A.”