Hutton v. Sayat
KRISTIN ERNEST HUTTON
Law Firm / Organization
Lloyd Law Corporation
Lawyer(s)

Jack Lloyd

RIA SAYAT
Law Firm / Organization
Goldblatt Partners LLP
Lawyer(s)

Natai Shelsen

LYNN DUHAMIE also known as STEPHANIE DUHAMIE the former Canadian Charge D’Affaires for the Republic of Iraq
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Law Firm / Organization
Department of Justice Canada
Lawyer(s)

James Stuckey

  • Background: The Attorney General of Canada (AGC) filed a motion to have Kristin Ernest Hutton declared a vexatious litigant under Section 40 of the Federal Courts Act, supported by Ria Sayat (defendant). Hutton, a lawyer, filed multiple lawsuits alleging that individuals in his life, including former romantic partners and employers, were agents of Canada's security services.

  • Diagnosis & Legal Proceedings: Following the lawsuits, the Law Society Tribunal evaluated Hutton's capacity to practice law. A forensic psychiatrist diagnosed him with a delusional disorder, which influenced his litigation. His license was suspended indefinitely in December 2023. Hutton did not provide medical evidence to challenge the diagnosis.

  • Legal History: Hutton filed several claims and appeals involving federal agencies and individuals. Many claims were struck down for lack of evidence or merit. Notably, claims related to alleged intelligence work against him by two former partners (Sayat and Duhamie) were dismissed. Despite this, Hutton filed further lawsuits and appeals, continuing to target the same individuals and organizations.

  • Court's Decision: The Federal Court declared Hutton a vexatious litigant, citing his repeated filing of unfounded and redundant claims and his persistent disregard for previous court orders. It also ordered that existing lawsuits be discontinued or quashed, with leave required before filing any new cases.

  • he Plaintiff was ordered to pay to the AGC costs of the motion fixed in the all-inclusive, lump sum amount of $2,305.50.

Federal Court
T-268-17
Constitutional law
$ 2,306
Defendant
24 February 2017