T-448-80
Jacques Lanctôt, André J. Bélanger and Gaétan
M. Legault (Plaintiffs)
v.
The Queen (Defendant)
Trial Division, Marceau J.—Ottawa, June 17 and
18, 1980.
Practice — Motion to strike pleadings — Defendant applied
under Rule 419 to dismiss the statement of claim of plaintiff
Legault as disclosing no reasonable cause of action, and to
strike out certain paragraphs because they were improperly
pleaded — Statement of claim contends that R.C.M.P. officers
intervened unlawfully in attempts of plaintiffs Lanctôt and
Bélanger to validate pre-war German bonds, and that a crimi
nal charge was laid in bad faith against Lanctôt and Legault
and that Lanctôt and Bélanger lost considerable money due to
unlawful acts of defendant's officers — Application allowed
on ground that Legault held no securities and was not a victim
of the intervention — Federal Court Rule 419.
APPLICATION.
COUNSEL:
J. E. Allard for plaintiffs.
J. C. Ruelland, Q.C. for defendant.
SOLICITORS:
J. E. Allard, Hull, for plaintiffs.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada for
defendant.
The following is the English version of the
reasons for order rendered by
MARCEAU J.: This is an application under Rule
419. Defendant is first seeking outright dismissal
of the statement of claim of one of the plaintiffs,
Gaétan M. Legault, on the ground that it discloses
no reasonable cause of action. Additionally, she is
asking that paragraphs 7 and 18 of the statement
of claim be struck out because they were improp
erly pleaded.
Despite its length and apparent complexity, the
statement of claim is relatively straightforward. It
contends that plaintiffs Lanctôt and Bélanger hold
pre-war German bonds which they attempted to
have validated by the German authorities in
accordance with the Agreement on German Exter
nal Debts signed at London in 1953; that
R.C.M.P. officers intervened unlawfully and in
bad faith in the German judicial process so as to
block plaintiffs' attempts to obtain this validation;
that one of these officers in addition laid a crimi
nal charge in bad faith against plaintiff Lanctôt
and plaintiff Legault with respect to these bonds
and the attempt to have them validated; that
plaintiffs Belanger and Lanctôt, as a result of this
unlawful behaviour by defendant's officers, lost
considerable sums amounting to $15,000,000. It
then asks that defendant be accordingly required
to pay Lanctôt $7,000,000, Belanger $6,000,000
and Legault punitive damages.
I too am unable to see what Legault has to do
with the matter. It is true that the statement of
claim mentions that Legault was also the subject
of a criminal complaint, but the allegation is only
incidental in the sense that the action is not based
(and at this stage at least it could hardly be) on
the manner in which the complaint was made, it is
based on the intervention by the federal officers in
the German judicial process. Legault was not a
victim of this intervention, since he was not a
holder of the alleged securities at issue.
With respect to the application to strike out the
two paragraphs in question, it also is valid. Para
graph 7 contains only argument, and paragraph 18
only reproduces an affidavit of a possible witness;
neither one has any place in a statement of claim.
ORDER
The application is allowed.
The statement of claim of plaintiff Legault is
struck out and the action dismissed with costs as to
him.
Paragraphs 7 and 18 are also struck out.
The other two plaintiffs will have to file and
serve on defendant an amended statement of claim
taking into account this order, and the time peri
ods for pleading are suspended until such filing
and service.
Defendant shall be entitled to the costs of her
application and may require them forthwith.
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.