http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/67286/index.do 
Ballantyne v. Canada[1] (March 12, 2014) involved a claim by Mr. Ballantyne against CRA and the Minister which was struck out by the Prothonotary as disclosing no cause of action. Mr. Ballantyne appealed to the Federal Court which affirmed the decision under appeal, notwithstanding that Mr. Ballantyne had filed a revised Statement of Claim:
[11] I am mindful, as was the Prothonotary, that the Applicant is a self-represented litigant who lacks the benefit of experience or advice on the Court process. However, while the Court generally shows flexibility and openness to self-represented parties, this alone does not exempt a party of its obligation to discharge its burden under Rule 51 (
Barkley v Canada, 2014 FC 39 at para 18).
[12] Even on a generous reading of the Statement of Claim I must agree with the Respondent and the Prothonotary that it provides insufficient facts to enable the cause(s) of action to be ascertained and that it is confusing and difficult to understand. It does not permit the Respondent to prepare a responsive defence. In that regard, I refer to and adopt the reasons contained in the Respondent’s written representations filed in this appeal. The Applicant’s appeal must be dismissed.
[13] I have also reviewed the revised Statement of Claim submitted by the Applicant which he submits is in the form that he should have filed originally. This does not assist the Applicant. It is comprised primarily of definitions, a statement of what comprises equality guarantees under section 15 of the Charter and a list of statutes. It does not elaborate on the factual basis of his claim or clarify his cause(s) of action. Similarly, the written representations that he has filed in support of his appeal do not provide a coherent or intelligible explanation of his claim.
[14] As to costs, the Minister seeks a lump sum award of $500. Recognizing both that the Applicant is elderly, self-represented and was the unsuccessful party, and that the appeal, while in writing, still required a response by the Respondent, I am awarding costs in the amount of $200 in favour of the Respondent.
[1]2014 FC 242.