The Verdict is in, with no surprises; what else could they do - at this late stage. Refer to the facts presented over all these years? Apply the actual Rules?
Because of the length of the text, I will break same down in the near future, and include my responses over a number of weeks. In the meantime I will mull over whether to cease and desist (i.e. Justice is a lost cause), or possibly confront Donald Trump, and ask for his opinion? :)> . (just kidding). But take it from me: The Legal posturing is without question: GROTESQUE , serious and proof our Democracy is a FARCE! "WHOA Canada, our CHROME and NAIVE Land!"
[With PDF's awkward to copy, in order to minimize confusion with the numbered paras (where Para [5] jumps to [6] then runs through to [13], before changing to actual [6] I have moved these paragraphs over to the right. (Clearly a construction error on the part of the transcriber) i.e. NOT me.]
==========================================================================================
COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
2016 BCCA 342
Date: 20160803
Docket: CA43781
Between:
Evert Jan Steen
Appellant
(Plaintiff)
And
The Ministry of Justice and the Attorney General for British Columbia
Respondent
(Defendant)
Before: The Honourable Madam Justice Garson
(In Chambers)
On appeal from: An order of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, dated February 12, 2016 (Steen v. British Columbia (Justice), 2016 BCSC 1132,
Victoria Docket 15-4257).
Appellant
(Plaintiff)............................................In Person
Counsel for the Respondent (via Telephone): J.Van Camp
Place and Date of Hearing: Vancouver, British Columbia July 22, 2016
Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, British Columbia August 3, 2016
Steen v. British Columbia (Justice) ...............Page 2
Summary:
The applicant seeks an extension of time to appeal the dismissal of his claim against the Crown for damages arising out of the dismissal of his Provincial Court action by a Provincial Court judge. Held: The application is dismissed. A Provincial Court judge is immune from civil liability for acts or omissions done in the course of her judicial duties, therefore the appeal against the Crown for vicarious liability for the acts of a Provincial Court judge has no prospect of success. It would not be in the interests of justice to grant an extension of time.
Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Madam Justice Garson:
[1] The applicant, Evert Jan Steen, applies for an extension of time to appeal the order of Mr. Justice Gaul made on February 12, 2016, striking Mr. Steen’s notice of civil claim and dismissing the action.
Background
[2] Mr. Steen filed a notice of application in November 2015, seeking to have his claim determined by way of a summary trial. In response, the respondent Minister of Justice and Attorney General of British Columbia, applied to dismiss his claim pursuant to Rule 9-5(1)(a) and (d) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules on the basis that it disclosed no cause of action and was an abuse of process of the court.
[3] Gaul J. determined that the nature of the claim being advanced was a complaint against a Provincial Court judge for failing to provide Mr. Steen with the correct advice concerning jurisdiction. The Provincial Court judge had determined that Mr. Steen commenced his claim in the wrong registry in non-compliance with the Small Claims Rules, and dismissed his claim on the basis of absence of jurisdiction.
[4] Gaul J. concluded that there was nothing in the notice of civil claim that set out any foundation, legal or otherwise, justifying or supporting the claims made against the respondent (at para. 12). Mr. Steen’s notice of civil claim was therefore struck and his action dismissed.
Steen v. British Columbia (Justice) .......Page 3
[5] In dismissing Mr. Steen’s claim, Gaul J. said at paras. 6-13 of his reasons for
judgment (indexed at 2016 BCSC 1132):
[6] As best I can determine, having read the notice of civil claim a number
of times, and having heard Mr. Steen’s submissions, he alleges a Provincial
Court judge erred when, in May of 2010, she dismissed his original Small
Claims action against an Ontario corporate defendant. Specifically, Mr. Steen
contends that the judge erred when she advised him that he should sue the
corporate defendant in Ontario and when she advised him to appeal her
decision dismissing his action.
[7] Mr. Steen asserts he followed the judge’s flawed advice and that in
doing so he incurred significant costs and expenses. This is the foundation of
his claim for damages against the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of
British Columbia. It remains unexplained how he reached the actual sum of
$125,000 in damages.
[8] Mr. Steen appealed the Provincial Court judge’s decision dismissing
his original action. That appeal came before Madam Justice Dardi of this
court in August of 2010. Because the respondent had served its material late,
Mr. Steen requested and was granted an adjournment of the hearing so that
he could properly respond to the issues being raised by the respondent. For
reasons that are not clear to me, Mr. Steen did not pursue his appeal.
Instead, he chose to abandon it. He then pursued a lawsuit against the same
corporate defendant in Ontario. That legal action, it would appear, was
unsuccessful. Mr. Steen has now turned his attention back to British
Columbia and seeks relief from the Minister of Justice and Attorney General
for what he says are the errors the Provincial Court judge made in his original
action.
[9] I have read the transcript of the proceedings in Provincial Court, as
well as the judge’s reasons for judgment. I do not agree with Mr. Steen when
he says the judge provided him with erroneous legal advice. In my view, the
judge found Mr. Steen had filed his action in the incorrect registry and as
such he had not complied with the Small Claims Rules. In the result, she
dismissed his claim, concluding the Provincial Court of British Columbia did
not have jurisdiction to hear it. At the conclusion of the proceeding, the judge
explained to Mr. Steen:
"If you wish to appeal my decision, then you’re certainly welcome to do
that, but I can’t tell you how to do that."
[10] In my opinion, the judge was not giving Mr. Steen legal advice, nor
was she telling him what he should do.
[11] Mr. Steen did appeal from the Provincial Court judge’s decision, but
as I have already noted, he abandoned that appeal. That occurred about six
years ago. While my function today is not that of an appellate court, I will note
that the time for determining whether the Provincial Court judge erred when
she rendered her decision in May 2010 has long since passed.
[12] I understand that Mr. Steen may be frustrated and disillusioned with
his attempts to pursue his original civil claim against the corporate defendant.
He initiated that claim in British Columbia, but it was dismissed because the../
Steen v. British Columbia (Justice) .......Page 4
court held it lacked jurisdiction to hear it. His subsequent attempt to pursue
the claim in Ontario was also unsuccessful. Be that as it may, the fact of the
matter is I can find nothing in the notice of civil claim that is before me that
sets out any foundation, legal or otherwise, that justifies or could support the
claims Mr. Steen is making against the Minister of Justice and Attorney
General of British Columbia. In my opinion, the notice of civil claim discloses
no reasonable claim and to allow it to proceed would amount to
an abuse of
the court’s process.
[13] For all of these reasons, I am ordering, pursuant to Rule 9-5(1), that
Mr. Steen’s notice of civil claim be struck out and that his action be
dismissed.
[6] The order in question was made on February 12, 2016 and entered February 18, 2016. Mr. Steen did not file his notice of appeal until July 11, 2016.
Law
[7] Section 14(1) of the Court of Appeal Act provides:
14 (1) The time limit for bringing an appeal or an application for leave to
appeal is
- (a) 30 days, commencing on the day after the order appealed from is
pronounced, or
(b) if another enactment specifies a different period, that different period.
[8] The time limit to appeal therefore runs from the date an order or ruling was pronounced, even if written reasons are to follow: Romfo v. 1216393 Ontario Inc., 2008 BCCA 106 at para. 23.
[9] However, s. 10 provides that a justice may extend or shorten the time within which an appeal may be brought:
10 (1) A justice may extend or shorten the time within which an appeal to the court or application for leave to appeal may be brought.
- (2) In an appeal or other matter before the court, a justice may do one or more of the following:
- .....
Steen v. British Columbia (Justice) ........ Page 5
[10] The criteria for an extension of time to begin an appeal were set out in Davies
v. C.I.B.C. (1987), 15 B.C.L.R. (2d) 256 at 259-260 (C.A.) and may be summarized
as follows:
[12] The burden is with the applicant to demonstrate that the criteria are met: Kedia International Inc. v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2008 BCCA 305 at para. 8.
Discussion
[13] Mr. Steen filed his notice of appeal four months after the expiration of the appeal period.
[14] It is evident from his affidavit evidence that this delay was the result of
Mr. Steen’s misapprehension that he had 30 days from the date of receiving written reasons for judgment to file his appeal, rather than 30 days from the date of the order. He says that he received written reasons on June 1, 2016, and then discovered that the time limit had expired.
[15] I accept that Mr. Steen likely had a bona fide intention to appeal the February 12 order, and that the delay was caused by his erroneous understanding of the law. It is unclear whether the respondent was informed of Mr. Steen’s intention to appeal. The delay in this case is relatively short, and it is unlikely that the respondent has been significantly prejudiced by that delay. The respondent concedes that this../
-
1) Was there a bona fide intention to appeal?
-
2) When were the respondents informed of the intention?
-
3) Would the respondents be unduly prejudiced by an extension of time?
-
4) Is there merit in the appeal?
-
5) Is it in the interest of justice that an extension be granted?
[12] The burden is with the applicant to demonstrate that the criteria are met: Kedia International Inc. v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2008 BCCA 305 at para. 8.
Discussion
[13] Mr. Steen filed his notice of appeal four months after the expiration of the appeal period.
[14] It is evident from his affidavit evidence that this delay was the result of
Mr. Steen’s misapprehension that he had 30 days from the date of receiving written reasons for judgment to file his appeal, rather than 30 days from the date of the order. He says that he received written reasons on June 1, 2016, and then discovered that the time limit had expired.
[15] I accept that Mr. Steen likely had a bona fide intention to appeal the February 12 order, and that the delay was caused by his erroneous understanding of the law. It is unclear whether the respondent was informed of Mr. Steen’s intention to appeal. The delay in this case is relatively short, and it is unlikely that the respondent has been significantly prejudiced by that delay. The respondent concedes that this../
Steen v. British Columbia (Justice) .... Page 6
application falls to be determined on the basis of the merits (or lack thereof) of the
appeal itself. Thus, the threshold question on this application is whether the appeal
is doomed to fail, or whether it can be said confidently that the appeal is without
merit: Stewart v. Postnikoff, 2014 BCCA 292 at para. 6 (Goepel J.A. in Chambers).
This principle applies even where the other Davies factors are met: Stewart.
[16] In my view, the chambers judge correctly stated Mr. Steen’s underlying complaint in para. 8 of the reasons. In his affidavit, Mr. Steen says, “I hold the Ministry responsible for a BC Judge’s erroneous dismissal (based on ‘lack of Jurisdiction’), regarding a web-based claim I previously filed in Courtenay, BC, Registry”.
[17] Mr. Steen’s remedy against a Provincial Court judge’s decision is by way of appeal. He cannot sue a judge personally for a decision he asserts is wrong.
[18] Judicial immunity, inherited through the common law of England, prevents an action from being maintained against a superior court justice in relation to acts or omissions occurring in the performance of his or her judicial duties: Morier and Boily v. Rivard, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 716 at 737-740.
[19] That immunity is conferred on judges of the Supreme Court of British Columbia through s. 3(1) of the Supreme Court Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 443, which states:
The Chief Justice, Associate Chief Justice and judges have all the powers, rights, incidents, privileges and immunities of a judge of a superior court of record, and all other powers, rights, incidents, privileges and immunities that on March 29, 1870, were vested in the Chief Justice and the other justices of the court.
See also: Hill v. British Columbia (1997), 36 B.C.L.R. (3d) 211 at para. 22.
[20] The same immunity that protects judges of the Supreme Court is extended by statute to judges of the Provincial Court through s. 42 of the Provincial Court Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 379:
[16] In my view, the chambers judge correctly stated Mr. Steen’s underlying complaint in para. 8 of the reasons. In his affidavit, Mr. Steen says, “I hold the Ministry responsible for a BC Judge’s erroneous dismissal (based on ‘lack of Jurisdiction’), regarding a web-based claim I previously filed in Courtenay, BC, Registry”.
[17] Mr. Steen’s remedy against a Provincial Court judge’s decision is by way of appeal. He cannot sue a judge personally for a decision he asserts is wrong.
[18] Judicial immunity, inherited through the common law of England, prevents an action from being maintained against a superior court justice in relation to acts or omissions occurring in the performance of his or her judicial duties: Morier and Boily v. Rivard, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 716 at 737-740.
[19] That immunity is conferred on judges of the Supreme Court of British Columbia through s. 3(1) of the Supreme Court Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 443, which states:
The Chief Justice, Associate Chief Justice and judges have all the powers, rights, incidents, privileges and immunities of a judge of a superior court of record, and all other powers, rights, incidents, privileges and immunities that on March 29, 1870, were vested in the Chief Justice and the other justices of the court.
See also: Hill v. British Columbia (1997), 36 B.C.L.R. (3d) 211 at para. 22.
[20] The same immunity that protects judges of the Supreme Court is extended by statute to judges of the Provincial Court through s. 42 of the Provincial Court Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 379:
Steen v. British Columbia (Justice) Page 7
42. Judges and justices have, for things done or not done by them in their
official capacity, the same immunities from civil liability as judges of the
Supreme Court have for the things done or not done by them in their capacity
as judges of the Supreme Court.
See also: Hill at para. 22.
[21] There is no cause of action available to Mr. Steen in a suit against the Crown for an allegedly erroneous decision of a Provincial Court judge. It follows that there is no merit to the appeal of the decision dismissing Mr. Steen’s claim as disclosing no cause of action.
[22] Because Mr. Steen’s proposed appeal is without merit, it would not be in the interests of justice to grant an extension of time to commence the appeal.
Disposition
[23] The application to extend the time to file an appeal is dismissed.
See also: Hill at para. 22.
[21] There is no cause of action available to Mr. Steen in a suit against the Crown for an allegedly erroneous decision of a Provincial Court judge. It follows that there is no merit to the appeal of the decision dismissing Mr. Steen’s claim as disclosing no cause of action.
[22] Because Mr. Steen’s proposed appeal is without merit, it would not be in the interests of justice to grant an extension of time to commence the appeal.
Disposition
[23] The application to extend the time to file an appeal is dismissed.
“The Honourable Madam Justice Garson”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Post a Comment