Vexatious litigant who sued brother denied permission to appeal: Alberta Court of Appeal

Litigant filed more than 60 applications and appeals since 2015

Vexatious litigant who sued brother denied permission to appeal: Alberta Court of Appeal
Elderly with dementia may require family to manage their affairs

The Alberta Court of Appeal has denied a vexatious litigant’s permission to appeal the order declaring that he was a vexatious litigant.

In Rana v. Rana, 2022 ABCA 306, Salim Rana sued his brother Zahir Rana, who represented their mother who had dementia. The dispute arose from a promissory note allegedly signed by the mother in 2014. Zahir managed their mother’s financials at the time, which was also the subject of the litigation.

Salim was involved in over 60 applications and appeals since 2015 and was declared a vexatious litigant in 2022. He had previously sought permission to appeal the order, which was allowed on a narrow issue of procedure, which required Zahir to comply with notice to the Minister of Justice and the Solicitor General of a vexatious litigant.

Zahir applied to vary the order after complying with this requirement. The appellate court granted the application and varied the order on the basis that failure to notify the Minister had no substantive impact on the vexatious litigant order.

Salim sought permission to appeal this variation order on the same ground of non-compliance.

The appellate court dismissed the appeal.

Vexatious litigant requires permission to appeal

The test for permission to appeal requires the applicant to show an important question of law or precedent, a reasonable chance of success on appeal, and that the delay will not hinder the progress of the action or cause undue prejudice, said the court.

In this case, Salim “clearly [failed] to meet any of the three parts of the test for permission to appeal,” said the court. The decision had rectified the failure to give notice and rendered the previous decision granting permission to appeal moot, said the court.

As such, the appellate court dismissed the application for permission to appeal and ordered costs in favour of Zahir.

Recent articles & video

Canadian Law Awards 2023: Event Highlights

SCC case may clarify permissibility of ‘common-sense assumptions’ by judges in sexual assault cases

Institute of Corporate Directors names Gigi Dawe as new Vice President of Policy and Research

Federal Court of Appeal hears tax, Charter, grievance matters this week

Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill met with threats from West

The exponential growth of data risks

Most Read Articles

SCC finds company committed abusive tax avoidance in case dealing with general anti-avoidance rule

The Law Society of Ontario governing coalition will face serious challenges

For AI, intellectual property must now reward and incentivize creativity and inventiveness: lawyer

Roundup of law firm hires, promotions, departures: May 29, 2023 update