Background:

• Glycobiosciences Inc. sought judgment against L’Oreal Canada Inc. and Lenczner Slaught LLP.
• The case was based on the same facts as a prior Federal Court case where Glycobiosciences was the plaintiff, and L’Oreal was the defendant.
• Kevin Drizen, a non-lawyer, was denied leave to represent Glycobiosciences in Federal Court.

Key Legal Issues:

• Representation by a Non-Lawyer: Glycobiosciences sought leave for Drizen to represent the company in Ontario Superior Court, despite being a non-lawyer.
• Legal Requirements: Under Rule 15.01(2) of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure, corporations must be represented by a lawyer unless leave is granted for a non-lawyer to act.

Court’s Analysis:

• Criteria for Non-Lawyer Representation: The court considers several factors, including authorization by the corporation, the representative's connection to the corporation, the ability to comprehend legal issues, and the financial capacity to retain counsel.
• Justice's Determination: The interests of justice must favor non-lawyer representation, which was not found in this case.

Decision:

• Leave Denied: The court declined to grant leave for Drizen to represent Glycobiosciences, citing the following reasons:
  • Glycobiosciences had the financial capacity to hire a lawyer.
  • The representation by a non-lawyer could potentially abuse the judicial process.
  • Previous conduct by Drizen in similar cases demonstrated issues such as abuse of process and unpaid legal costs.

Conclusion:

• Costs: Parties were directed to resolve costs among themselves, failing which, the court would hear submissions.
• The court did not specify a total monetary award.