Ringrose v. Stevenson; Ringrose v. MacDonald; Ringrose v. Haddad; Ringrose v. Clement, (1982) 35 A.R. 62 (QBM)

• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: February 05, 1982
• Citations: (1982), 35 A.R. 62 (QBM)

Ringrose v. Stevenson (1982), 35 A.R. 62 (QBM)

MLB headnote and full text

Ringrose v. Stevenson; Ringrose v. MacDonald; Ringrose v. Haddad; Ringrose v. Clement

(Nos. 8203-01491, 8203-01490, 8203-01487, 8203-01489)

Indexed As: Ringrose v. Stevenson; Ringrose v. MacDonald; Ringrose v. Haddad; Ringrose v. Clement

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Funduk, Master in Chambers

February 5, 1982.

Summary:

The plaintiff claimed damages in four separate actions against the defendant judges for delivering wrong judgments. The judges applied to strike out the statements of claim in each action.

A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application. The Master found that the statement of claim in each action did not disclose a cause of action, was vexatious and an abuse of the process of the court.

Practice - Topic 2230

Pleadings - Striking out pleadings - Grounds - Failure to disclose a cause of action - A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that no cause of action lies against a judge for what he does in the course of his official duties - See paragraph 21.

Cases Noticed:

Cryderman v. Ringrose, [1978] 3 W.W.R. 481; 6 A.R. 21, refd to. [para. 3].

Zimmer v. Ringrose (1979), 13 A.R. 181, affd. [1981] 4 W.W.R. 75; 28 A.R. 69, leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused; [1981] 4 W.W.R. liv; 37 N.R. 289, refd to. [para. 5].

Ringrose v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of the Province of Alberta (1979), 13 A.R. 147, leave to appeal refused 15 A.R. 180, refd to. [para. 7].

Ringrose v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of the Province of Alberta (1978), 8 A.R. 113, leave to appeal refused 10 A.R. 628, refd to. [para. 9].

Fieldbloom v. Olympic Sport Togs Limited (1955), 14 W.W.R.(N.S.) 26, refd to. [para. 13].

Foy v. Foy, 12 C.P.C. 188, refd to. [para. 13].

Sirros v. Moore, [1974] 3 All E.R. 776, consd. [para. 15].

Demeter v. Dominion Life Assurance Co., 125 D.L.R.(3d) 708, appld. [para. 22].

Asher v. Secretary of State for the Environment, [1974] 2 All E.R. 156, refd to. [para. 25].

Oak v. Frobisher Limited (1959), 27 W.W.R.(N.S.) 595, refd to. [para. 25].

Kozlakosky v. Kazlakosky (1955), 14 W.W.R.(N.S.) 514, refd to. [para. 25].

Kay v. Wirstiuk, [1978] 1 W.W.R. 317; 8 A.R. 405, adopted [para. 26].

Statutes Noticed:

Rules of Court (Alta.), rule 129(1)(a) [paras. 1, 16]; rule 129(1)(b), rule 129(1)(d) [paras. 1, 24].

District Court Act, R.S.A. 1970, c. 111, sect. 25 [para. 15].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Brooms Commentaries on the Common Law (8th Ed.), pp. 102-104 [para. 19].

Holdsworth, A History of English Law, vol. 6, p. 234 et seq. [para. 20].

Counsel:

Plaintiff in person;

J. Brumlik, for the defendants.

This application was heard before FUNDUK, Master in Chambers of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on February 5, 1982.