In Sekulovski v Maisonneuve, 2021 ONSC 1418, Justice Myers stated that: “By endorsement dated February 8, 2021, I directed the registrar to provide notice … that the court was considering dismissing this action under Rule 2.1 for being frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process. I advised … expressly as follows: On reading the claim, it appears to me that it may be frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process. It is drafted in the abusive style of an Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument discussed by Rooke ACJ, in Meads v Meads 2012 ABQB 571. Rather than setting out allegations of fact in plain English, it uses the silly naming conventions and meaningless trespass notices that are typical of the genre.” And at the conclusion of the decision: “This type of gibberish is abusive on its face. Its purpose is to clog the courts and make people waste time responding rather than helping people with actual cases. The action is dismissed without further analysis.”
On March 23, 2022, in Sekulovski v. Georgiou, 2022 ONSC 1819, Justice Cavanagh provided Orders that resulted in substantial payments being made by the respondent regarding the estate in dispute, and interestingly, even an Order that he be required to pay punitive damages, to be paid out of the estate. The Orders also included, in part, a declaration as to a dependant within the meaning of the SLRA; A declaration that adequate provision was to be made out of the estate for the proper support of the dependant; An order that the respondent shall pay to the estate $251,875.10; An order that the balance of the residue of the estate after payment of the estate’s liabilities, debts, and expenses shall be divided in equal shares among three of the named parties, including the respondent; An order that the respondent pay punitive damages in the amount of $10,000; and an order that any and all amounts payable to the respondent out of the estate shall be set off against amounts he owes to the estate.
The Ontario court cited the Alberta decision in Meads to make the cost orders. In the result, vexatious litigants should be aware of the costs associated with their actions.
Thanks for reading,