ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
CANADA ) Court File No.:
PROVINCE OF ONTARIO )
INSERT COURT’S )
FULL ADDRESS )
JOEL VIAU
(Petitioner)
-vs-
BRIANNE BROOKS; and
ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE, SMALL CLAIMS COURT
89 JAMES ST., PARRY SOUND, ON P2A 1T7
(Respondents)
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Dated this ____ day of September, 2022.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________
Joel Viau,
Petitioner in pro per
NOW COMES Joel Viau, Petitioner, and files this Petition for Writ of Mandamus, and for
cause would show this Honorable Court as follows:
A. PARTIES
1. Petitioner Joel Viau is a law-abiding male adult citizen of sound mind and a
resident of [Insert Address].
2. Respondent Brianne Brooks is a female adult citizen of sound mind and a
resident of [Insert Address].
3. Respondent Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court is a court mandated
with administering justice as a trial court within Ontario.
B. JURISDICTION
4. This Petition has been filed against the Ontario Court of Justice. A petition for writ
of mandamus against a court should be filed in the next higher court. This Court
has jurisdiction by being the next higher court after the Ontario Court of Justice
Small Claims Court.
C. STATEMENT OF FACTS
5. Petitioner was married to Ms. Brooks and have an ongoing child custody case
before the Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court. Mr. Viau is the plaintiff
and Ms. Brooks is the defendant in the case. The case number is [Insert Case
No.].
6. On [Insert Date], Petitioner filed a Motion to Strike Defendant’s Answer before
the court.
7. However, the Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court has declined to hear
Petitioner’s Motion to Strike Defendant’s Answer. No substantial reason has
been offered for the refusal to hear the motion.
8. Petitioner would like this Court to issue a writ of mandamus compelling the
Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims court to hear Petitioner’s Motion to Strike
Defendant’s Answer.
D. ARGUMENT
9. Petitioner hereby incorporates by reference ¶ 1-8 of this Petition as though set
out in full herein.
10. For this Court to issue a writ of mandamus, a number of conditions must be
satisfied.
11. Mr. Justice Kelen writing in Dragan v. Canada, (M.C.I.) (2003), 228 F.T.R. 52
(TD) reviewed the criteria set down by the Federal Court in Apotex Inc. v.
Canada (Attorney General), 1993 CanLII 3004 (F.C.A.) as follows: (1) there must
be a public legal duty to act; (2) the duty must be owed to the applicant; (3) there
is a clear right to the performance of that duty; (4) no other adequate remedy is
available to the applicant; (5) the order sought will be of some practical value or
effect; (6) the Court in the exercise of discretion finds no equitable bar to the
relief sought; and (7) on a “balance of convenience” an order in the nature of
mandamus should issue.
12. The Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court has jurisdiction to hear
Petitioner’s child custody case. In that regard, it has jurisdiction to hear all
motions filed in the case.
13. The jurisdiction places upon the court a legal duty to hear all motions and
consider all pleadings filed by Mr. Viau and Ms. Brooks since they are parties to
a case in which the Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court has jurisdiction
to hear.
14. The Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court had/has a duty to hear Mr.
Viau’s Motion to Strike Defendant’s Answer.
15. There is no other remedy available to Petitioner as the Ontario Court of Justice
Small Claims Court is the only one with jurisdiction to hear Mr. Viau’s Motion to
Strike Defendant’s Answer.
16. The writ of mandamus compelling the Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims
Court to hear Mr. Viau’s Motion to Strike Defendant’s Answer is of value to Mr.
Viau as he would like a determination on whether or not the relief sought in the
Motion to Strike Defendant’s Answer will be granted.
17. There is no equitable bar to the relief Petitioner is seeking, a writ of mandamus
compelling the Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court to hear Mr. Viau’s
Motion to Strike Defendant’s Answer. Petitioner is simply asking this Court to
compel the Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court to perform its duty.
18. The “balance of convenience” tips over in favor of Petitioner. He is in limbo
regarding the Motion to Strike Defendant’s Answer. A writ of mandamus will
compel the Ontario Court of Justice Small Claims Court to issue a determination.
E. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
REASONS WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Petitioner respectfully requests
this Honorable Court to ISSUE a Writ of Mandamus compelling the Ontario Court of
Justice Small Claims Court to hear and issue a ruling on Mr. Viau’s Motion to Strike
Defendant’s Answer.
Dated this ____ day of September, 2022.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________
Joel Viau,
Petitioner in pro per
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )