This vexatious ICBC litigant with no lawyer,(Pearlman v. ICBC, 2012 BCCA 398) tried to appeal, without success, an order made by the Supreme Court of British Columbia restricting his ability to continue filing lawsuits. The appellant also complained that his pleadings were modelled on textbook pleadings and the Judge was wrong to say they disclosed no cause of action. However, the Court of Appeal found that the judge was clearly correct in saying the action was groundless, oppressive, brought for an improper purpose and could not be sustained.
It appears that all the litigation initiated by this claimant stemmed from a motor vehicle accident. His tort action against Atlantic Trading and Ms. Spence went to trial and a jury rejected the claim. That result spawned more litigation. The claimant sued ICBC and the ICBC adjuster over the obtaining of the medical report from his family doctor. The defendants in the ICBC action were substantially successful and the balance of the claim went to a jury trial but the trial judge dismissed the claim on a no evidence motion.
As the Court of Appeal stated at para 22,
The record clearly demonstrates that Mr. Pearlman has exceeded the bounds of proper litigation in respect to his accident of November 2004, and the litigation in respect to that accident must be brought to an end. There is no basis at all to interfere with the order of Madam Justice Garson denying leave to appeal on this issue. She clearly was not arbitrary as alleged by Mr. Pearlman, made no error of law or principle, and indeed was manifestly correct.