2020 QCCA 1804, 2020 QCCA 1804

ASEQ c. Hrabovskyy 2020 QCCA 1804 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-028844-207 ( 500-17-107563-192 ) MINUTES OF HEARING DATE: December 4, 2020 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE FRANÇOIS DOYON, J.A. SUZANNE GAGNÉ, J.A. STEPHEN W. HAMILTON, J.A. APPLICANT COUNSEL ASEQ Mtre GUY POITRAS ( Gowling WLG (Canada )) (by videoconference) RESPONDENT VOLODYMYR HRABOVSKYY Unrepresente d (by conference call) IMPLEADED PARTIES COUNSEL DAS PROTECTION JURIDIQUE INC.

Mtre VÉRONIQUE ROY (Langlois Avocats) (by videoconference) DESJARDINS ASSURANCES Mtre ESTHER HOULE ( Cholette Houle ) (by videoconference) DESCRIPTION: Amended Application of ASEQ to declare the appellant a quarrelsome litigant (Articles 51 and 55 C.C.P . and 13 of the Civil Practice Regulation ) Clerk at the hearing : Lesly Ramos Courtroom: Pierre-Basile-Mignault

HEARING 9 : 30 Commencement of the hearing. Continuation of the hearing held on November 30, 2020 The parties were excused from appearing in Court. BY THE COURT : Judgment – see page 3. Conclusion of the hearing. Lesly Ramos, Clerk at the hearing JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The Applicant ASEQ presents a motion to have the Respondent Volodymyr Hrabovskyy declared a quarrelsome litigant under

Article 55 C.C.P. and

Section 13 of the Civil Practice Regulation (Court of Appeal) . [ 2 ] In this matter, the Respondent sued Desjardins Assurances, DAS and ASEQ in Superior Court on April 25, 2019, because they refused to cover his legal fees in an action he had instituted against the Université de Montréal. He asked that they be ordered to cover his legal fees and to each pay him $12.5 million and $10,000 per month.

His action against the insurers was dismissed and declared abusive by the Superior Court (the honourable Janick Perreault) on February 11, 2020. [1] His appeal was dismissed and also declared abusive on June 15, 2020. [2] On August 1, 2020, the Respondent made a motion to this Court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada as well as a motion to suspend execution of the Court’s judgment and a supplementary motion to order ASEQ to provide its defenses and to limit those defenses.

At the hearing this week, the Respondent withdrew the motion for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court and the other two motions were dismissed. [ 3 ] ASEQ’s motion must be considered in the context of other litigation instituted by the Respondent.

He was declared a vexatious litigant by the Federal Court on April 10, 2017 in relation to unrelated litigation. [3] In addition to the action which is the subject of the present appeal, he has instituted five other actions in the Superior Court since February 2019: three of those actions have been dismissed on preliminary motions, [4] a motion to dismiss is pending in the fourth action, [5] and the final action is pending in Superior Court. [6] [ 4 ] He has filed four appeals with respect to the three actions (other than the present action) which have been dismissed: two motions for leave to appeal were dismissed, [7] and one motion for leave to appeal is pending. [8] The fourth appeal related to his unsuccessful attempt to obtain a default judgment in one of the Superior Court matters: the motion for leave to appeal in that case was dismissed. [9] [ 5 ] He asked the Court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court in one matter prior to this one.

His motion was dismissed in that matter, [10] and the motion in the present matter was withdrawn as a result. [ 6 ] In each of his five appeals, the proceedings filed by the Respondent are unfocussed and rambling, make serious allegations of fraud and corruption against many individuals and institutions without any evidence, cite grand principles of law such as the Magna Carta and the United Nations Declaration and other international treaties that have no relevance to the matters at hand, and claim remedies that include astronomical amounts of money and unreasonable orders. [ 7 ] A pattern of quarrelsome conduct seems to be emerging. [ 8 ] However, the Court does not consider it necessary at this stage to declare the Respondent a quarrelsome litigant.

Even though his appeals so far have been without merit, the Respondent has always acted appropriately before this Court — he has not multiplied the incidental proceedings, he has not sought multiple postponements, and he has treated the Court and its personnel with respect. When his appeals have been dismissed, he has not sought to retract the judgment or to reintroduce the appeal by other means.

He has sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, as is his right, but that does not concern the Court. [ 9 ] Moreover, there is no need to declare the Respondent quarrelsome in order to protect ASEQ from vexatious litigation as there

will be no further proceedings in the present matter involving ASEQ unless the Supreme Court grants leave to appeal. There is before the Court one other outstanding motion for leave to appeal involving other parties, which is scheduled to be heard in January 2021. If the proposed appeal has no reasonable chance of success or is otherwise not in accordance with the principle of proportionality, it will be dismissed. As for future appeals that may arise in other matters, they will be dealt with in the ordinary course.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 10 ] DISMISSES the Applicant ASEQ’s motion to have the Respondent Volodymyr Hrabovskyy declared a quarrelsome litigant, without costs. FRANÇOIS DOYON, J.A. SUZANNE GAGNÉ, J.A. STEPHEN W. HAMILTON, J.A.