A Nanaimo man who had a $32-trillion lawsuit thrown out of court earlier this year was unsuccessful in trying to appeal that decision.
Tyler Chamberlin, who filed a civil claim against ICBC in 2020 after he was struck by a vehicle while riding his bike in a hit-and-run in 2018, had his application to the B.C. Court of Appeal thrown out on Tuesday, July 20.
The hearing was July 5 in Vancouver, with the appellant and lawyers for seven respondents – ICBC, the Attorney General of B.C., the Attorney General of Canada, Island Health, the City of Nanaimo, the Chief Electoral Officer of B.C. and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. – participating via teleconference.
Justice Reginald Harris wrote in his judgment that the appellant, at the hearing, attempted “to expand the scope of his appeals” and when the judge tried to provide guidance, the appellant “interrupted me repeatedly with profanity-laden outbursts.”
Harris concluded it was unnecessary to hear from respondents and adjourned the hearing, giving the appellant a week to provide written submissions, which were received July 13.
The B.C. Court of Appeal judgment notes that Chamberlin did not articulate “any argument to suggest the judge made an error” in the Supreme Court decision and instead attempted to raise “substantive issues” not subject to appeal.
The appellant asked that the court order Island Health to pay a $1-billion fine, B.C. Ferries a $1-million pay “for denying Mr. Chamberlin access [and] obstructing justice,” and require the Queen to “tell the truth about COVID-19” and Bible prophecy. The judge wrote that he would not dignify the appellant’s arguments by recounting them in detail.
“Much of it is abusive. Moreover, the argument contains overt threats … More importantly, the argument is entirely irrelevant to the issues on this appeal,” the judge wrote. “The argument is rooted in Mr. Chamberlin’s belief that in some way his motor vehicle accident was a result of a giant conspiracy, rooted in corruption throughout Canada.”
The B.C. Supreme Court judge, this past winter, had opted against a vexatious litigant order because of doubt that Chamberlin would be able to comply with new court filing standards.
The Appeal Court judge said Chamberlin will not be entitled to file further applications for appeal unless he is able to obtain an order allowing him an extension of time to file certain court documents.