|
JR - Frivolous and Vexatious [RCP R2.1]. Ashar v. Ontario Labour Relations Board
In Ashar v. Ontario Labour Relations Board (Ont Div Ct, 2026) the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed a labour OLRB JR, this on a R2.1 'frivolous and vexatious' motion where the underlying grounds alleged "unlawful reprisal under the Occupational Health and Safety Act".
The court applies the doctrine of JR 'prematurity', here in a R2.1 frivolous and vexatious dismissal:[10] I accept that Mr. Ashar has not brought his application in bad faith. However, his application is patently premature. The decision he seeks to have reviewed is an interim decision of the Board. The Board dismissed Mr. Ashar’s request that he be granted default judgment. In its May 26, 2025 directions, it had said that a “Consultation hearing” would be scheduled to deal with the remaining allegations that had not been dismissed. The Board therefore will proceed to deal with the allegations it has permitted Mr. Ashar to pursue. If Mr. Ashar ultimately is dissatisfied with the decision of the Board at the conclusion of its proceedings, he can seek to judicially review the Board’s final decision, which can include the procedural steps leading to that decision.
[11] Absent exceptional circumstances, courts should not interfere in ongoing administrative proceedings until after they are completed or until effective remedies are exhausted. This is a principle “scrupulously” followed in this court to avoid the fragmentation of proceedings: Awada, at paras. 7-9.
[12] Mr. Ashar believes the court should intervene because the Board should not have allowed the responding party to continue to participate in his application since it did not respond to Board directions. But the Board found the responding party had already submitted a response to the application, so there was no basis for default judgment. In any event, the Board’s decision to allow an application to proceed to a decision on the merits in the face of a request for default judgment does not on its own constitute exceptional circumstances.
[13] Mr. Ashar has raised a concern about access to judicial oversight. As I have said, that will be available to him at the completion of the Board process. The court will not intervene at this stage of the Board’s proceeding. The application is doomed to fail and therefore is dismissed pursuant to r. 2.1.01.
|
