A suspended Vancouver legal professional who misplaced a “frivolous” lawsuit in opposition to her neighbour over a pitcher deck divider has been ordered to pay the lady just about $30,000 in prices, most likely finishing a case that authorized mavens had described as extremely odd.
Naomi Arbabi had claimed trespass in opposition to her neighbour, Colleen McLelland. McLelland declined an interview, however her legal professional said to CBC Information on Tuesday.
“She’s feeling both pleased and somewhat vindicated by the fact that she obtained a reasonable amount of compensation for being dragged through the proceedings she was dragged through,” mentioned Greg Palm, managing spouse at Hamilton Duncan Legislation Company.
One skilled on pseudo-legal arguments described the case as “magical gibberish,” month every other mentioned it used to be “extraordinarily rare” to look this sort of declare from a practicing legal professional. The pass judgement on who disregarded the case mentioned it bore the hallmarks of claims made by way of OPCA [Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments] litigants” — legal theories favoured by fringe groups like Sovereign Citizens and Freemen on the Land.
Settlement offer for $14k
In her original claim filed in October, Arbabi accused McLelland of trespassing upon her by obstructing her mountain view when the strata of their Fairview condo building installed a 1.7-metre-high opaque glass privacy divider on McLelland’s rooftop deck.
A judge dismissed the case in January and ordered Arbabi to pay special costs — money “normally awarded as a punishment for behavior that the courtroom determines to be reprehensible,” Palm said. The only issue left to sort out was the amount Arbabi needed to pay.
According to the ruling Monday, McLelland offered Arbabi a deal: They could settle costs for just over $14,200 if Arbabi paid by March 8.
Arbabi agreed to the dollar amount, but said she would pay in instalments over the next 40 years.
McLelland declined to wait until 2064, so the issue went back to court.
In her decision, special registrar Meg Gaily said Arbabi needed to pay McLelland a little more than $29,500 to cover the time and money she had spent representing herself, adding McLelland had to take more time researching and learning civil procedure “to do business in with the OPCA litigation than she in a different way would have.”
Gaily said the special costs will also go toward reimbursing Palm and the legal team, who helped McLelland on a pro bono basis.
“Ms. Arbabi selected to litigate in a way that used to be … repugnant to the assurance that she and I each swore after we become attorneys to conserve the rule of thumb of legislation and to chorus from bringing court cases on frivolous pretenses,” said Palm, speaking to why he took the case on for free.
“On the finish of the hour, this award displays the truth that there are repercussions for doing that.”
Arbabi has the right to apply to the court for a review of a registrar’s decision for 14 days. CBC News contacted Arbabi for comment through her custodian, which is a practising lawyer appointed to manage or to wind up a legal practice. The custodian referred the inquiry to the Law Society of B.C., which declined to reach out to Arbabi, citing confidentiality.
In dismissing Arbabi’s original claim earlier this year, B.C. Supreme Court Associate Judge Susanna Hughes said the “frivolous and vexatious” lawsuit was an attempt from Arbabi to use the court “for the needs of her fictional courtroom.”
The judge said the lawsuit didn’t have a reasonable legal basis and showed “most of the hallmarks” of claims made by OPCA litigants.
The ruling on costs said Arbabi has taken responsibility for the claim, but “denied that she is an OPCA litigant.”
Arbabi resigned law licence in January
In her original claim, Arbabi identified herself in her original claim as “i, a girl” and said the case would be tried in the “naomi arbabi courtroom.”
She wrote that “it is a declare according to legislation of the land, and now not a criticism according to authorized codes acts or statutes” and asks for compensation equal to $1,000 a day for every day the glass divider had been in place — which would’ve added up to more than $130,000 by the time the claim was thrown out.
When Arbabi appeared in court in November to fight McLelland’s application to dismiss her claim, she said she was appearing as “a dwelling, respiring, alive girl,” not a lawyer, and denied any association with organized pseudo-legal groups.
Hughes ordered Arbabi to pay special costs for violating the oath taken by all lawyers called to the bar in B.C., which includes a promise not to “advertise fits upon frivolous pretences.”
At the time she filed her claim last fall, Arbabi was a lawyer in good standing with the Law Society of B.C. She resigned her licence to practise law in the province this January, several weeks after it had been suspended over the case against McLelland.
Arbabi agreed to meet with a reporter in November to discuss her lawsuit, but declined to answer any questions when she arrived. Instead, she read out a notice warning of legal consequences if a story were published without her consent.
During a later interview on a podcast, Arbabi described her legal approach as “legislation for mankind.” Arbabi said she started taking courses through a website called the Sovereign’s Way after going through what she called an awakening during the COVID-19 pandemic.
She mentioned she had additionally come to grasp the authorized gadget as being like a board recreation she has selected to not play games.
