Date: 20020715
Docket T-193-02
Neutral Citation: 2002 FCT 788
Ottawa, Ontario, this 15th day of July, 2002
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BLANCHARD
BETWEEN:
KYU-BOM HAHN
JI-JON LEE (MOTHER)
Plaintiff
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN in right of CANADA
Defendant
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
I. This is a motion dated March 13, 2002, on behalf of the defendant in writing seeking the following relief:
(1) an order pursuant to Rule 221 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, striking out the statement of claim and dismissing the action with costs on the ground that the statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action; is frivolous, vexatious and scandalous; and is an abuse of the process of the Court; or
(2) in the alternative, for an order pursuant to Rule 8 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, extending the time for serving and filing a statement of defence to 30 days from the date of issuance of the order.
II. This is a claim for damages in the amount of $2,500,000.00 against Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (the "CCRA") and in the amount of $1,000,000.00 against the Minister of Transport.
III. The plaintiff, Kyu-Bom Hahn, also appears to be pleading for his deceased mother, who is identified in Part II, paragraph 1 of the statement of claim:
"..., Head of the 6 member family (76 year-old mother killed by herself protesting against Canadian government's inhumane and unconstitutional detention),..."
From the pleadings, it is impossible to determine whether the plaintiff Ji-Jon Lee (Mother) is properly a plaintiff to the proceeding or whether her son, the plaintiff Kyu-Bom Hahn, has standing to represent her estate. It is also impossible to determine from the pleadings, what cause of action, if any, the plaintiff mother's estate seeks to bring since there are no clear material facts to support any of the vague allegations.
IV. The plaintiff's originating document in this action consists of a statement of claim, 9 pages in length, including the standard style of cause page and an index along with a 24 page appendix. The appendix contains evidence, such as newspaper articles, the plaintiff's letters to the CCRA, and letters from Transport Canada to Mr. Hahn. These appendices are evidence and are in a form and substance outside the purview of a statement of claim properly pleaded and constituted in accordance with the Federal Court Rules, 1998.
V. The claim against CCRA appears to be grounded on the "fabricated accusations of two auditors" and "putting the plaintiff into the prison and the Mental hospital". The claim against the Minister of Transport to the extent to which one can read from the pleadings, appears to be for "...unlawful termination of his governmental position , (TIA Toronto International Airport)." In both cases, the allegation against the CCRA and the allegation against the Minister of Transport, no material facts are pleaded to support these vague allegations.
VI. In particular, with regards to the unlawful dismissal claim, there is reference to an "unlawful termination of my position, ..." in the pleadings. However, no material facts are pleaded with regards to the contract of employment or the alleged "unlawful" dismissal. The plaintiff fails to establish what happened to him and how the damages he suffered, if any, are related to the defendant's actions.
VII. The statement of claim contains essentially bare statements in the nature of assertions, conclusions and questions. I reproduce the following paragraphs found in the statement of claim.
· At paragraph 2, Part I, page 2, the plaintiffs claim:
"$1 Million for the Plaintiffs, Canadians' tears, pain sufferings, hardship, damages, life (1.D.), Mother's life, suffered due mainly to Hon. Minister's (Employees) racial discriminatory, uncivilized, inhumane, and unlawful termination of his governmental position, TIA (Toronto International Airport), Transport Canada, International Duty Free Tender Evaluation Authority (Supervisor, PM-4), successfully established through the national-wide selection process, more than 50 qualified competitors, August, 1978, more than 10 months advertisement."
· At paragraph 3, Part I, page 3, the plaintiffs claim:
"$3.5 Million (1.2) is grossly underclaimed compensation compared to Mr. Morin's, White Canadian, compensation awarded:$1.25 Million only detained for 14 months, Ottawa Citizen article, January 25, 1997 (For further details, please refer to page: 10). My non-white Canadian, unlawful detention was 8 years (Nearly 7 times longer than Mr. Morin's, White-Canadian. Furthermore, my mother's life was sacrificed by Canadian government's uncivilized, inhumane, injustice, unconstitutional detention and destruction."
· At paragraph 2, Part II, page 4, the plaintiffs allege that:
"(Hon. Minister, Revenue Canada and Hon. Minister, Transport Canada) They have not only constitutional , elected obligations but also highly paid duties to oversee their employees (2 Tax-auditors (1.A- D) & Director General, TIA, Transport Canada (2)) daily operations in the most cost effective, civilized, justice, humanly, no racial discriminatory and constitutional manner. In other words, they are not only representing, Her Majesty The Queen in right of Canada, Defendant, Federal Government, but also they are responsible for every Canadian's freedom, human, constitutional rights, safety, justice, welfare and employment. OTHERWISE why do we, every Canadian, have to pay taxes, pay their wages and elected them to be Ministers, Prime Minister, Federal Court Justice, Department of Justice's lawyers, and other public servants?"
· At paragraph 2A, Part II, page 4, the plaintiffs allege that:
"Unfortunately, they did not fulfill their, Defendants, paid duties. Therefore, indirectly they put me in the prison and the Mental Hospital for the last 8 years and destroyed everything I built and contributed in my wholelife (1,2).
Furthermore indirectly they killed my mother, 76 year-old Canadian (1.D.)."
· At paragraph 1D, Part V, page 6, the plaintiffs state that:
"During this argument (B,C), it was merely lip-services, daily workhour-killing practices for the Tax-auditors BUT it was our 6 memer-family's life-threatening, soul searching beggings, cries, tears and last petitions."
· At paragraph 2B, Part V, page 8, the plaintiffs plead:
"Even though I had been successfully, faithfully fulfilled my duties and responsibilities delegated under TIA, governmental position, commuting every weekends from Ottawa to Toronto, September 1978-October, 1979, my immediate supervisor, Mr. L. Radizevicious, Marketing Manager, TIA, recommended to the Deputy Minister, terminating my position in order mainly to cover up their internationally held "duty Free Shop" tender evaluation criterias, disagreements with my position and political sensitivities.
VIII. The plaintiff also makes the following allegations in his statement of claim:
(i) that a tax auditor unlawfully imposed taxes in the amount of $73,986.00;
(ii) that he was placed in a prison and mental hospital between May 1992 and May 2000; and
(iii) that he had been injected with "abnormal psychic medication" against his will.
The plaintiff does not provide any particulars or details with respect to any of these allegations.
IX. The statement of claim consists of many unconnected and often incomplete sentences. There is no real thread of factual material or particulars which lead logically through these assertions and conclusions to the claim for damages. In short, the statement of claim is incoherent and even after an extensive review, and despite a generous reading, it is not possible to determine what claim is being made against the defendant. In my view, the claim is unmanageable, both for the defendant to plead and for the Court to control.
X. The plaintiff fails to establish what happened to him and how the damages he suffered, if any, are related to the defendant's actions. The statement of claim not only fails to set out a precise statement of material facts but also fails to clarify the issues so that the defendant would know the case to be met. The vague and unsubstantiated claims, as pleaded, are not sufficient to found any cause of action or causes of action for which the plaintiff may have a remedy at law as against the defendant.
XI. In conclusion, I am satisfied that this statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action and has not the slightest chance of success.
XII. In addition, I conclude that the statement of claim should be struck as scandalous, frivolous and vexations and an abuse of process. The claim is prejudicial as well as futile and not susceptible of leading to a legal remedy with respect to the facts alleged. The Crown cannot respond to the claim as pleaded nor could the Court regulate the conduct of such an action.
XIII. I have further concluded that the statement of claim is so fundamentally flawed that it is beyond being salvaged by amendment.
XIV. In Court file No. T-1626-01, the plaintiff, Mr. Hahn, made very similar allegations to those he makes in the within statement of claim. In that case, by reasons for order dated January 29, 2002, Prothonotary Aronovitch concluded that the statement of claim should be struck as scandalous, frivolous and vexatious, and an abuse of process.
XV. While the statement of claim in the within proceeding is not identical to that in Court file No. T-1626-01, there are significant similarities between the two cases. I am of the view that, to the extent to which the plaintiff Mr. Hahn is attempting to re-litigate the same issues in the within proceeding that were raised in Court file No. T-1626-01, without leave of the Court, is an abuse of process.
XVI. For the above reasons, the claim will be struck in its entirety without leave to amend.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. The motion is granted as requested.
2. The claim will be struck in its entirety without leave to amend and the action is dismissed.
3. In the circumstances where this motion in writing did not require a hearing, I exercise my discretion pursuant to Rule 400 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, and order that costs be awarded on this motion in the amount of $250.00 in favour of the defendant.
"Edmond P. Blanchard"
Judge
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-193-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: Kyu-Bom Hahn et al. v. Her Majesty the Queen
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: Rule 369 motion
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER: BLANCHARD J.
DATED: July 15, 2002
APPEARANCES: Rule 369 Motion
FOR PLAINTIFF / APPLICANT
FOR DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Kyu-Bom Hahn, Acting President FOR PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
First Canadians' Constitution Draft Committee
The United (Federated/Confederated) Korean Government
c/o Unity & Seniors Canada Bldg
1808-445 richmond Road
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 3W6
Morris Rosenberg FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Department of Justice
Room 2242, East Memorial Bldg.
284 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0H8