37109  Valentin Pintea v. Dale Johns, Dylan Johns

(Alta.)

Civil procedure – Contempt of court – Case management

The applicant commenced an action against the respondents with respect to a car accident in 2005. Although he was initially represented by counsel, he became a self-represented litigant. When the applicant insisted that the matter be set down for trial, the case management judge directed him to produce his witness list and to comply with other procedural requirements, which he failed to do. The applicant moved to a new neighbourhood but did not file a change of address with the court as required by the Rules of Court. He therefore did not receive subsequent notices sent to him about meetings and applications and did not attend court as required. When the applicant did not appear at a case management meeting on January 21, 2015, the case management judge directed that the applicant be serviced with a notice advising that if he did not appear a week later, he would be found in contempt and the action would be struck. The applicant did not receive notice of the meeting prior to the date set and did not attend. The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench struck out the applicant’s statement of claim for failure to comply with the terms of case management orders and failure to attend at case management meetings. The appellate court dismissed the applicant’s appeal, with Martin J.A. dissenting.

37037  Attorney General of Canada v. Larry Philip Fontaine in his personal capacity and in his capacity as the Executor of the estate of Agnes Mary Fontaine, deceased, et al.

(Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Civil procedure – Class actions – Case management

In the course of the Independent Assessment Process (“IAP”), which provided a second level of compensation to former students who were victims of certain kinds of serious harm, questions arose about what was to become of the highly confidential documents created during the IAP after it came to an end. Library and Archives Canada also issued a Records Disposition Authority requiring that certain IAP records held by Northern Affairs Canada, having been deemed by the National Archivist to be of enduring historical value, be transferred to Library and Archives Canada. In 2013, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Chief Adjudicator of the Indian Residential Schools Adjudication Secretariat each brought a Request for Directions to the court. They both requested the development of a notice program to inform claimants that they could archive some of their IAP documents at the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation. The Chief Adjudicator also sought an order that all other copies of the IAP documents in the hands of the parties be destroyed.

The Supervising Judge ordered that the IAP documents were not to be transferred to Library and Archives Canada. The Chief Adjudicator was to retain the IAP documents for a 15-year retention period, during which period all rights of appeal and review would be exhausted. After 15 years, the documents were to be destroyed. IAP documents not held by the Chief Adjudicator were to be destroyed, with certain caveats. Claimants could archive their own IAP documents with the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation, and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission or the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation could carry out a notice program to inform claimants of that right. The majority of the Court of Appeal ordered that the notice program was to be carried out by the Chief Adjudicator. Otherwise, the appeal and cross appeals were dismissed.