Is there any abuse of process or vexatiousness in the context of the main motion?

Is there here involved any abuse of process? As regards the main motion, it does not appear to me that it is frivolous and vexatious. None of the issues raised in the main motion are insubstantial. Further, it does not appear to me that any ground cited is so untenable — particularly in light of the uncertain impact of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms — that the court would be justified in saying at this stage of the proceedings that it could not be resolved in favour of the applicants in the main motion. It must be remembered that the court is not now being called upon to decide the merits of the main motion: Patterson v. Proprietary Mines Ltd. et al., [1945] O.W.N. 662 at p. 663. Whether or not the applicants in the main motion are entitled to the relief they seek and whether or not this court has jurisdiction to grant that relief ought not to be decided at this time, but only after full argument on the merits, unless the answer admits of no doubt whatsoever.