Lin v. Canada (Attorney General)

Lin v. Canada (Attorney General)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2017-09-22
Neutral citation
2017 FCA 197
File numbers
A-457-16
Decision Content
Date: 20170922
Docket: A-457-16
Citation: 2017 FCA 197
CORAM:
NADON J.A.
STRATAS J.A.
WEBB J.A.
BETWEEN:
KATHERINE LIN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on September 20, 2017.
Judgment delivered at Toronto, Ontario, on September 22, 2017.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
NADON J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY:
STRATAS J.A.
WEBB J.A.
Date: 20170921
Docket: A-457-16
Citation: 2017 FCA 197
CORAM:
NADON J.A.
STRATAS J.A.
WEBB J.A.
BETWEEN:
KATHERINE LIN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
NADON J.A.
[1] This is an appeal of two orders made by Mr. Justice Campbell of the Federal Court (the Judge) on November 28, 2016 pursuant to which he dismissed two appeals taken by the appellant against orders of Prothonotary Aalto dated November 7, 2016.
[2] In the first of his orders, the Prothonotary struck in its entirety the appellant’s statement of claim in which she sought $20,000 in damages against the respondent, the Attorney General of Canada. In the Prothonotary’s view, the statement of claim was unintelligible and it did not contain any material facts to support a cause of action against the respondent. More particularly, the Prothonotary was of the view that the statement of claim was scandalous, frivolous and vexatious. Hence, he struck the statement of claim in its entirety and granted the respondent costs in the amount of $500.
[3] In his second order, the Prothonotary dismissed a motion brought by the appellant wherein she sought judgment by default against the respondent for his failure to file and serve a statement of defence to her action. Because he had already granted the respondent’s motion to strike the statement of claim, the Prothonotary concluded that the appellant’s motion was moot and he dismissed it with costs in the sum of $200.
[4] The appellant appealed both of the Prothonotary’s orders to a judge of the Federal Court pursuant to Rule 51(1) of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106. On November 28, 2016 the Judge dismissed both appeals because he was of the view that the Prothonotary had made no palpable and overriding error in rendering his decisions.
[5] The appellant now appeals the Judge’s orders to this Court. After a careful review of the appellant’s written and oral submissions, we have come to the conclusion, regretfully for the appellant, that there is no basis whatsoever which could justify intervention on our part. Although during the course of her oral submissions, the appellant spoke to us at length regarding the events which led to the commencement of her action against the respondent, she did not, however, persuade us that, in striking her statement of claim and concluding that her motion for default judgment was moot, the Prothonotary had made an error in respect of which the Judge ought to have intervened.
[6] Consequently, the appeal will be dismissed with costs.
"M. Nadon"
J.A.
“I agree
David Stratas J.A.”
“I agree
Wyman W. Webb J.A.”
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
Docket:
A-457-16
(APPEAL FROM ORDERS OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CAMPBELL DATED NOVEMBER 28, 2016, FEDERAL COURT FILE NO. T-1634-16)
STYLE OF CAUSE:
KATHERINE LIN v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
PLACE OF HEARING:
Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING:
September 20, 2017
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
NADON J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY:
STRATAS J.A.
WEBB J.A.
DATED:
September 22, 2017
APPEARANCES:
Katherine Lin
For The Appellant
(SELF-REPRESENTED)
Stewart Phillips
For The Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Nathalie G. Drouin
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For The Respondent