Date: 19980501
Docket: T-617-98
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Applicant
- and -
RAMESH MISHRA
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
NADON J.:
[1] This motion is brought by the Attorney General of Canada under sub-section 40(1) of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7. The Attorney General seeks the following order:
| 1. That no further proceedings be instituted in this Court by Mr. Ramesh Mishra now except by leave of the Court; and |
| 2. That the proceedings previously instituted by Mr. Ramesh Mishra, namely Court File Nos. T-54-98, T-291-98 and A-21-98, not be continued, except by leave of the Court. |
[2] The Attorney General submits that the Respondent Ramesh Mishra "has persistently instituted vexatious proceedings and has conducted proceedings in a vexatious manner". Section 40(1) of the Federal Court Act provides:
| 40. (1) Where the Court is satisfied, on application, that a person has persistently instituted vexatious proceedings or has conducted a proceeding in a vexatious manner, the Court may order that no further proceedings be instituted by the person in the Court or that a proceeding previously instituted by the person in the Court not be continued, except by leave of the Court. |
40. (1) La Cour peut, si elle est convaincue par suite d'une requête qu'une personne a de façon persistante introduit des instances vexatoires devant elle ou y a agi de façon vexatoire au cours d'une instance, lui interdire d'engager d'autres instances devant elle ou de continuer devant elle une instance déjà engagée, sauf avec son autorisation. |
[3] In support of his application, the Attorney General filed the affidavit of Josephine A.L. Palumbo, legal counsel with the Civil Litigation Section of the Department of Justice, sworn on April 3, 1998. The Attorney General of Canada has given his consent to the bringing of the present application.
[4] After reading the affidavit of Josephine Palumbo and the exhibits attached thereto, I am satisfied that the order requested by the Attorney General should be made. I note that on October 27, 1997, Sedgwick J. of the Ontario Court (General Division) made a similar order under subsection 140(1) of the Ontario Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C-43. Sedgwick J. ordered that except by leave of a judge of the Ontario Court (General Division), Mr. Mishra could not institute any further proceedings in the courts of Ontario nor could he continue any proceedings previously instituted in these courts.
[5] At pages 19 through 29 of his reasons for judgment, Sedgwick J. deals with the application brought for an order under subsection 140(1) of the Courts of Justice Act which reads as follows:
140 (1) Where a judge of the Ontario Court (General Division) is satisfied on application that a person has persistently and without reasonable grounds,
(a) instituted vexatious proceedings in any court; or
(b) conducted a proceeding in any court in a vexatious manner,
the judge may order that,
(c) no further proceeding be instituted by the person in any court; or
(d) a proceeding previously instituted by the person in any court not be continued, except by leave of a judge of the Ontario Court (General Division).
[6] For all intents and purposes, this section is the same as subsection 40(1) of the Federal Court Act.
[7] I have carefully read Sedgwick J."s reasons and more particularly his summary of the applicable law. For the reasons given by Sedgwick J., I, like him, am of the view that the proceedings instituted by Mr. Mishra are vexatious. Consequently, it is my view that an order under subsection 40(1) of the Federal Court Act is appropriate in these circumstances.
[8] Thus, Mr. Mishra will not be allowed to institute further proceedings in this Court except by leave of the Court. Further, the proceedings already instituted by Mr. Mishra in Court File Nos. T-54-98, T-291-98 and A-21-98 shall not be continued except by leave of the Court.
"MARC NADON"
Judge
Ottawa, Ontario
May 1, 1998