February 19, 2018
Dutil, Rancourt, Roy
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court rendering a declaration of abuse, quarrelsomeness, and disqualification from acting as representative in the context of a class action. Dismissed, with dissenting reasons.
The appellant argues that only his counsel, not he himself, should have been declared a vexatious litigant. The trial judge did not commit a palpable and overriding error in finding that the appellant is not an innocent victim but that he acted together with his counsel. Moreover, there is no reviewable error in deciding to withdraw the status of representative from the appellant in the absence of a replacement. Indeed, the court may, at any stage of the proceedings in a class action, prescribe measures designed to hasten their progress. Furthermore, the provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure (CQLR, c. C-25.01) must be interpreted so as to facilitate the normal advancement of cases rather than delay it. The court must also see to the orderly progress of the proceedings, intervene to ensure the proper management, and in the event of abuse, subject the furtherance of the action to certain conditions.
An RSS feed allows you to keep up to date with any recent updates published on a website. By subcribing to our RSS feed, you will automatically receive the latest news related to your RSS feed and view them at any time.