2011 QCCA 1155, 2011 QCCA 1155

U.G. c. D.F. 2011 QCCA 1155 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-021682-117 ( 500-05-002605-895 ) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: June 15, 2011 THE HONOURABLE NICHOLAS KASIRER, J.A. PETITIONER ATTORNEY U. G. Personally RESPONDENTS ATTORNEY D. F. M. P. ABSENTS MIS EN CAUSE ATTORNEY F. F. H. G. A. GR. LE CURATEUR PUBLIC DU QUÉBEC ABSENTS

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT RENDERED ON APRIL 15, 2011 BY THE HON. MICHEL DÉZIEL OF THE SUPERIOR COURT DISTRICT OF MONTREAL Clerk: Annick Nguyen Court Room: RC.18 HEARING 10:36 Commencement of the hearing. 10:37 Submission by Mr. G.. 10:39 BY THE JUDGE. 10:40 Continuation of Mr. G.’s submission. 10:46 BY THE JUDGE. Judgment to be rendered on the minutes of the hearing. 14:00 Judgment – See page 3.

Annick Nguyen Clerk JUDGMENT [ 1 ] Petitioner seeks leave to appeal from an interlocutory judgment of the Superior Court, District of Montreal (the Honourable Michel Déziel), rendered on April 15, 2011 in which his motion for authorization to file an amended defence was dismissed. He also asks for an order that, should leave be granted, the appeal be joined with another file that concerns him that is pending before the Court. [ 2 ] By judgment rendered on May 1, 2002 by the Honourable A. Derek Guthrie of the Superior Court, the petitioner was declared a vexatious litigant.

According to that judgment, the petitioner requires permission to amend the defence. [ 3 ] The motions judge observed that the petitioner has no interest to demand the destitution of the testamentary executor in the principal action. Accordingly, the judge concluded that the defence, even if amended, has no reasonable chance of success. Authorization to amend the proceeding was therefore denied. [ 4 ] The petitioner alleges a series of errors in the judgment, including in the judge's account of the main action generally and of the proceedings concerning the petitioner in particular.

He also submits that alleged gaps in the law treating judgments bearing on vexatious litigants serve to deny him his right to a full and fair hearing of his case.

[ 5 ] The petitioner has failed to convince me that any of the alleged errors or the other matters raised justifies that leave to appeal be granted. I note that the absence of the other parties at this hearing does not, in itself, provide grounds for granting leave to appeal. Mindful of the criteria in articles 29 and 511 C.C.P., I am of the view that the pursuit of justice does not require that leave be granted. [ 6 ] FOR THESE REASONS , the undersigned: [ 7 ] DISMISSES the motion for leave to appeal; [ 8 ] DECLARES the other conclusions sought by the petitioner to be without object; [ 9 ] There is no order as to costs, as the other parties did not appear to contest. NICHOLAS KASIRER, J.A.