Ontario Superior Court of Justice
My Civil Action against WSIB/WSIAT - February 2014
This is my story continuing from when I attempted to file an application for judicial review in court in July 2013.
Click here if you wish to read that part of my story first
Table of Contents
I have provided a list of bookmarked categories to make it easier to navigate this page
My Statement of Claim - February 20, 2014
A Right to Self-representation
Order for Default Judgement - May 14, 2014
My Amended Statement of Claim - July 23, 2014
WSIB & WSIAT Motions to Dismiss my Statement of Claim - September 23, 2014
WSIB and the WSIAT Motion Materials - September 2014
My First Appearance before the Superior Court of Justice
My Responding Motion Materials - 2015
WSIAT’s Second Motion - 2015
My Second Appearance before the Superior Court of Justice - October 21, 2015
My Third Appearance before the Superior Court of Justice - August 15, 2016
My Statement of Claim - February 20, 2014
On February 20, 2014, after performing a lot of research and learning, I filed a statement of claim against the WSIB and the WSIAT.
Filing a statement of claim is the first step in bring a lawsuit against someone, a business, or a government agency.
Now before you start to read the statement of claim PLEASE remember something. Before my various work accidents, I was just a truck driver. I never even graduated high school. As I said before, I am NOT a lawyer, nor do I pretend to be., I have made countless mistakes and will continue to make many more, but I try my best to learn from my mistakes. I add this in as judges and lawyers seem to think what I know now is what I knew twenty years ago and I am the same as a lawyer, but they won’t respect me like one, or pay me like one LOL!
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of my statement of claim I filed with the court.)
As I said, I did not have a clue what I was doing, when I prepared my statement of claim. All I knew, was that the WSIB and the WSIAT were NOT going to get away with what they did to me.
Before I discuss my appearances in Court, I want to discuss what I learned afterwards and most importantly about being a self represented litigant in court.
A Right to Self-representation
Saying that an individual has a right to represent themselves is not the same as appearing and speak in a court, tribunal, or board. It means that the individual has a right to respect and most importantly they have a right to tolerance when they make mistakes. In my story, you will find that lawyers, and judges have had great intolerance and disrespect towards me as an SRL. Most shockingly what I learned was that it was not just limited to me, but a very common thing in Canada’s legal system.
Before I move any further along, I first want to define what respect and tolerance is.
Often you will hear people say that respect is earned. They are implying that you must work to earn their respect. To me they have perverted the meaning of respect. This is because the definition of respect is:
“A feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements. To also show due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others.”
so, as you can see there is more to the definition. It means that you have regard for other’s feelings, situation, and achievements. This is whether they are Judge, with decades of education and experience, or whether they are a homeless person. We respect a judge because they are very knowledgeable through their years of education, training, experience, and achievements. It also means that we show respect to people who are homeless because we do not know their situation that has placed them in their position. Please do not think I am attacking judges, because I am not. I have always had the highest respect for them. This is because to become a judge, is an extremely difficult thing. However, it does trouble me when a minority acts in a way to damage the reputation of judges. To learn more about the accountability of Canada’s Federally appointed judges, who sit in Canada’s Superior Courts, Court of Queen’s Bench and Supreme Courts. Check out the Canadian Judicial Council’s website https://cjc-ccm.ca/en.
This leads me into an important point about the Canadian Judicial Council and Canada’s federally appointed judges and their interactions with SRLs. The Canadian Judicial Council has developed principles for judges, Courts (including Boards & Tribunals - in my view), lawyers, and SRLs on how to conduct themselves with matters involve SRLs in the Courts (including Boards & Tribunals - in my view).
It is extremely important to note that SRLs:
“- Are expected to familiarize themselves with the relevant legal practices and procedures pertaining to their case;
- Are expected to prepare their own case; and
- Are required to be respectful of the court process and the officials within it. Vexatious litigants will not be permitted to abuse the process.”
So in other words you cannot just show up in court with no case prepared not knowing the rules and plead complete ignorance. However, this is completely different from making a genuine effort to prepare your case, learn the practices, learn the procedures, and learn process. Then you make a simple mistake. In this case under the principles a judge should overlook this in the interest of fairness, or justice. As stated in the principles:
“Judges and court administrators should do whatever is possible to provide a fair and impartial process and prevent an unfair disadvantage to self-represented persons.”
And
“Self-represented persons should not be denied relief on the basis of a minor or easily rectified deficiency in their case.”
The issue of SRLs being denied their right of justice, in Canada’s Courts, was confirmed in a 2013 scientific research study, which reviewed hundreds of cases involving SRLs and shockingly found that 96% of cases involving SRLs were dismissed before they even had a chance within the court, under what is called summary judgements.
Click here to download a copy of the report
The report was written Dr. Julie Macfarlane, who is a professor of law at the University of Windsor law school. After the release of the report Dr. MacFarlane started The National Self-Represented Litigants Project, which is an initiative that:
“is committed to advancing understanding of the challenges and hard choices facing the very large numbers of Canadians who now come to court without counsel. The NSRLP works to promote dialogue and collaboration among all those affected by the self-represented litigant phenomenon, both justice system professionals and litigants themselves. We regularly publish resources designed specifically for SRLs, as well as research reports that examine the implications for the justice system.”
This initiative is so important to Canadians that in 2019, I am very proud to say that Dr. Julie Macfarlane was award the Order of Canada. This is something, as when I congratulated Dr. Macfarlane, that I thought was only reserved for Canada’s snobs and elites, but not the case as Dr. Macfarlane is somewhat of rebel for justice!
The NSRLP has a website with loads of resources and helpful information for SRLs, including many research studies on the specific topic of SRLs. Including a podcast and a Blog.
The NRSLP website is https://representingyourselfcanada.com
If you can support them through a donation that would be amazing. Even if you cannot financially donate to them, you can still support them in other ways by encouraging others to support their initiative including friends, MPPs/MLAs, MPs, and others. It is simple as just doing a Facebook post and a Tweet. They have even setup and location in western Canada to address their specific needs out west.
Well even the Supreme Court of Canada has jumped on board to regonize the growing crisis of the lack of representation of individuals in Canada’s courts, when in 2017 they issued their decision Pintea v. Johns 2017 SCC 23 and in their decision the Supreme Court of Canada endorsed the Canadian Judicial Council’s Principles on SRLs and in effect brought them into law.
Back to my Statement of Claim against the WSIB and the WSIAT
When a party brings an action or application before the court, known in the court as a plaintiff, a defendant has so much time to provide a response to the Court. If the defendant(s) do not, then the plaintiff can go to the court and request an order from the court for a default judgement.
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
Order for Default Judgement - May 14, 2014
On or about May 14, 2014, I had requested the court order the defendants, the WSIB and the WSIAT be held in default. My reasoning was they took no action to defend my claim. The default matter is heard in chambers. On May 20, 2014, in the Endorsement, of Justice Leonard Ricchetti denied my request on the grounds a motion to strike was being prepared.
(Click the image,to download a pdf copy
of the judge's Endorsement)
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
My Amended Statement of Claim - July 23, 2014
This was in the hopes I could rectify anything I had missed in my original claim.
Unfortunately I do not pressently have access to that document, but when I can I will put it here.
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
WSIB & WSIAT Motions to Dismiss my Statement of Claim - September 23, 2014
In response to me filing my statement of claim and serving it on the WSIB, the WSIAT. The WSIB and the WSIAT each brought motions to dismiss my statement of claim.
This is what I was discussing earlier above, about SRLs claims being dismissed before they even get a chance in court.
(Click the image,to download a pdf copy
of the WSIB's motion to dimiss my statement of claim)
(Click the image,to download a pdf copy
of the WSIAT's motion to dimiss my statement of claim)
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
WSIB and the WSIAT Motion Materials September 2014
their Factum, their Motion Record and their Book of Authorities.
This is a placeholder for the WSIB and the WSIAT materials.
Unfortunately, I am currently homeless, something very common for injured workers, and I am staying with a friend. The physical books are in storage and are not accessible right now, but I will be adding them soon. This will be once I am able to get my own place again.
I do apologize for any inconvenience.
Important Side Note on Supporting Materials
I just want to take this opportunity to explain what I just listed above that I had received form the WSIB and the WSIAT.
Factum is a book which contains your legal arguments in support of your motion, application, or action.
They must state your fact in support of your arguments, with reference to evidence.
They must also state law, both written law and case law.
Record is a book containing previous orders, decisions in the matter, and evidence.
Book of Authorities is a book containing all the caselaw you are referring to in your Factum.
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
My First Appearance before the Superior Court of Justice
The judge allowed us to prepare a timetable for materials to be completed and exchanged. I had to agree to it, even thoguh I wa sunsure if I could meet the timetable.
The timetable was submitted to the judge and became part of his Honour’s Endorsement.
(Click the image,to download a pdf copy
of His Honour Justice Kofi Barne's Endorsement dated February 23, 2015)
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
My Responding Motion Materials - 2015
The WSIB’s Motion alleges that my statement of claim should be dismissed by the Court for the following reasons:
- That the Court does not have the jurisdiction,
- That my claim is frivolous, vexatious and/or an abuse of process of the Court.
The WSIAT’s alleges that my statement of claim should be dismissed by the Court for the following reasons:
- That my claim failed to plead the necessary material facts to assert a claim of assault,
- That my claim is frivolous, vexatious and/or an abuse of process of the Court,
- That the decisions of the WSIAT are not open to review by the Courts,
- That the WSIAT lacks the legal status and capacity to be sued for actions taken in carrying out those functions, and
- That my claim is limitation barred.
So, I did the best I could as a self-represented litigant and prepared my responding materials. I have never done this before, but as I have said before I was not going to let the WSIB and the WSIAT get away with what they did to me.
I prepared my responding materials in response to the WSIB and WSIAT motions.
My Responding Factum
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of my responding FatcumFile size 0.4meg.)
My Book of Authorities
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of my Book of Authorities.File size 3.8meg.)
My Responding Motion Record - Volume 1
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of Volume 1 of my Responding Motion Record - File size 36.2meg.)
My Responding Motion Record - Volume 2
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of Volume 2 of my Responding Motion Record - File size 19.1meg.)
My Responding Motion Record - Volume 3
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of Volume 3 of my Responding Motion Record)
My Responding Motion Record - Volume 4
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of Volume 4 of my Responding Motion Record)
My Responding Motion Record - Volume 5
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of Volume 5 of my Responding Motion Record)
Exhibit "U" - Audio Evidence
Exhibit "U" is composed of five parts, which are Exhibit U1 to U5.
The Exhibit U1 to U4 are the WSIAT official hearing audio.
I have just transcribed this and will make it available for my recent court action.
Exhibit U5 is a portion of my personal recording, which I made for my note taking purposes.
Exhibit "U1" - Audio Evidence
Exhibit U1 is the audio recording for Day 1 of the hearing, which was January 10, 2007. I was provided the day’s recording in seven individual parts, which I have provided for you below. I have listed them as sub-parts to Exhibit U1. You can download each one by clicking the link below.
Exhibit "U1a" - Audio Evidence 19.5meg
Exhibit "U1b" - Audio Evidence 2.3meg
Exhibit "U1c" - Audio Evidence 17.8meg
Exhibit "U1d" - Audio Evidence 0.7meg
Exhibit "U1e" - Audio Evidence27.7meg
Exhibit "U1f" - Audio Evidence 4.3meg
Exhibit "U1g" - Audio Evidence 1.5meg
Exhibit "U2" - Audio Evidence
Exhibit U2 is the audio recording for Day 2 of the hearing, which was July 3, 2007. I was provided the day’s recording in seven individual parts, which I have provided for you below. I have listed them as sub-parts to Exhibit U2. You can download each one by clicking the link below.
Exhibit "U2a" - Audio Evidence 19.5meg
Exhibit "U2b" - Audio Evidence 2.3meg
Exhibit "U2c" - Audio Evidence 17.8meg
Exhibit "U2d" - Audio Evidence 0.7meg
Exhibit "U2e" - Audio Evidence27.7meg
Exhibit "U2f" - Audio Evidence 4.3meg
Exhibit "U2g" - Audio Evidence 1.5meg
Exhibit "U3" - Audio Evidence
Exhibit U3 is the audio recording for Day 3 of the hearing, which was July 4, 2007. I was provided the day’s recording in seven individual parts, which I have provided for you below. I have listed them as sub-parts to Exhibit U4. You can download each one by clicking the link below.
Exhibit "U3a" - Audio Evidence 1.1meg
Exhibit "U3b" - Audio Evidence 4.3meg
Exhibit "U3c" - Audio Evidence 17.2meg
Exhibit "U3d" - Audio Evidence 15.5meg
Exhibit "U3e" - Audio Evidence6.6meg
Exhibit "U3f" - Audio Evidence 15.5meg
Exhibit "U3g" - Audio Evidence 3.7meg
Exhibit "U4" - Audio Evidence
Exhibit U4 is the audio recording for Day 4 of the hearing, which was July 5, 2007. I was provided the day’s recording in seven individual parts, which I have provided for you below. I have listed them as sub-parts to Exhibit U4. You can download each one by clicking the link below.
Exhibit "U4a" - Audio Evidence 12.1meg
Exhibit "U4b" - Audio Evidence 1.3meg
Exhibit "U5" - Audio Evidence
Exhibit U5, is my recoridng of the hearing, which I made for my note taking puposes.
I can tell you the quality of the audio is very poor, but you will find you can hear it, if you use ear buds and turn volume to max. I am looking at getting the entire audio recording professionally enhanced by a foresnsic expert, once I have the funds to do so.
Exhibit "U5" - Audio Evidence(MP3 File) 7.2meg
I have also provided you the note below
which provides the timestamp
of the critical points where it confirms the "bad faith" behavior of the Tribunal Panel Members.
Day 3
1:28 Vice chair leaves room worker rep and employer rep talk
1:29:41 man says fibro is good for 25% disability minimum over current 14% disability.
1:30:02 says OWA gave up on worker (not true OWA said would be a two-year waiting lists, fired lawyer he took 2 years to file appeal paperwork)
1:31:39 discussing worker starting business and stating it is not possible.
1:32:24 man says feeling like kicking him in the ass he has two kids
A note on this evidence many may think it is illegal and I can not publish it. This is incorrect, as you will learn, later in this story. It went before a judge to have the record sealed and it was denied, in favour of the "open courts principle".
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
WSIAT’s Second Motion
They were concerned with an audio recording, which I had provided the Court as Exhibit U.
The recording confirmed the bad faith conduct of the WSIAT Panel Members during the hearing in 2007.
The WSIAT’s second motion was asking for...
I am still working on this part. These materials are in storage and I hope to have them soon.
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
My Second Appearance before the Superior Court of Justice - October 21, 2015
The motion hearing was heard before his Honour Justice William M. Le May.
This particular hearing was interesting for two reasons.
First, there was an issue with a conflict of interest/bias with His Honour,
as His Honour personally knew two of the witnesses.
Second, I had requested to be allowed by His Honour to record the Court proceedings.
This was to accomodate my disabilities, that I cannot take detailed handwritten notes.
(Click the image,to download a pdf copy
of His Honour Justice William M. Le May' Endorsement dated October 21, 2015)
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
My Third Appearance before the Superior Court of Justice - August 15, 2016
The motion hearing was heard before his Honour Justice David Price.
Audio Recording of Motion Hearing of August 15, 2016
Unfortunately, due to limited resoruces I was not able to have the motion heairng transcribed,
but I was able to obtain the audio files. They are broken down into two parts.
They are an PDF document audio file.
Open the docuemnt in Adobe PDF and then to listen,
click on the green arrow to the left of the timestamp.
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of Hearing Recording File Size 0.5meg.)
(Click the image to download a pdf copy
of Hearing Recording File Size 33.8meg.)
His Honour Justice Price's Reasons for Decision - February 22, 2016
On February 22, 2016, His Honour Justice Price issued his Reasons for Decision.
In his reasons His Honour dismissed my Statement of Claim, and my Amended Statement of Claim.
Taylor v WSIB, 2017 ONSC 1223 (CanLII)
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
My Appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario
After receiving His Honour Justice Price's Reasons for Decision on February 22, 2016,
I filed a Notice of Appeal with the Court of Apepal for Ontario.
That is in a separate section under, My Story with the Onatrio Court of Appeal,
which is under the page heading My Civil Appeal C63503 March 2017.
Click here to go directly to that page.
Click Here to Return to Top of Page
I am still working on this page, Please check back, as I will
be updating this page with more information - SOOOOON!