Suspended lawyer banned from filing appeals in Manitoba after 'multitude of meritless' motions: decision

CBC

8 hours ago

A lawyer previously suspended from practising after being deemed incompetent has now been barred from starting or continuing proceedings in Manitoba's appeals court without permission from a judge, after being deemed a "vexatious litigant."
That decision follows a history of Vibhu Raj Jhanji bringing what the Court of Appeal of Manitoba called "a multitude of meritless appeals and motions," including challenges of a decision to suspend him from practising law, a related human rights complaint and a separate lawsuit about a failed real estate transaction.
A vexatious litigant is, by definition, someone who repeatedly files unfounded legal actions for improper purposes.
"Mr. Jhanji asserts that he is not vexatious, as he has simply taken proceedings and sought remedies that are available to him at law and under the court rules," the June 19 decision from three appeals court judges said.
"His position is that the [Law Society of Manitoba] is 'flouting the law' and has had its decisions 'rubber stamped' by the courts."
Meanwhile, the appeals court found Jhanji's actions met "most, if not all," elements needed for the legal test it used to determine whether proceedings should be deemed vexatious.
That includes starting multiple proceedings to relitigate matters that have already been decided, referring back in written materials to identical or nearly identical grievances from prior hearings and appeals — including allegations of bias against appeals judges — and trying to have lawyers for the law society and other responding parties disqualified, the decision said.
It's also "objectively clear that the proceedings will not result in the relief sought," the decision said, adding Jhanji has tried to have unsuccessful appeals heard again and appealed unsuccessful chambers motions.
Jhanji, who practised law in India for over two decades, was found incompetent to practise in Manitoba in January 2020, after a Law Society of Manitoba review found significant gaps in his knowledge of Canadian law.
That decision also raised concerns about how he was ever allowed to practise in Manitoba in the first place, given his level of incompetence.
He was later given a suspension of no less than three years, with the suspension extending indefinitely until he could establish his competency to practise.
As of Friday, his status with the Law Society of Manitoba was still listed as suspended.
'Frivolous' lawsuit, human rights complaint
Among the frivolous legal actions detailed in the appeals court's June decision was one Jhanji filed against defendants including the Law Society of Manitoba after the court dismissed challenges of his suspension.
That claim was later struck, with a judge describing it as an abuse of court process and a "frivolous and vexatious" attempt to relitigate a suspension that was already upheld several times, the decision said.
Jhanji then filed an appeal, along with a motion that tried in part to have the law society's lawyers disqualified. The motion was dismissed — a decision he also appealed.
Both those appeals were dismissed, as was a motion for a new hearing, and the court moved to declare Jhanji a vexatious litigant, the decision said.
Around the same time, Jhanji also filed a complaint against the law society with the Manitoba Human Rights Commission, "alleging systemic bias and that it discriminated against him because of his nationality" during his disciplinary hearings.
The commission declined to investigate, saying it lacked jurisdiction and the matter had already been determined by the courts. The commission also concluded the complaint was "frivolous and vexatious," the appeal court decision said.
Jhanji then sought a judicial review of the commission's decision, which was dismissed — prompting him to file another appeal.
'A now familiar pattern'
In November 2020, Jhanji also filed a separate statement of claim naming himself and a numbered company he's the sole director of as plaintiffs in connection with a failed real estate transaction, the decision said.
Jhanji ended up being struck as a plaintiff in that case and barred from representing the numbered company. He appealed and moved for a stay of proceedings, which was dismissed.
In the meantime, the deadline for filing an appeal brief also passed, resulting in the appeal being deemed abandoned, the decision said.
Jhanji then filed a motion before another judge to extend the time he had to file the brief. It was dismissed, and he appealed.
He also brought a motion seeking measures including disqualification of law society counsel and a notice of contempt being issued against them. That motion was also dismissed, then appealed, the decision said.
Jhanji's real estate claim ended up being struck — a decision appealed and dismissed by "yet another" judge — then appealed again, the Court of Appeal decision said.
In July 2024, Manitoba's chief justice denied a motion to give Jhanji permission to represent the numbered company on its three related appeals.
Other appeals related to that matter were also dismissed — and in "a now familiar pattern, Mr. Jhanji filed a motion for a rehearing of these appeals," which was also recently dismissed, the appeal court decision said.