What constitutes a frivolous or vexatious action?

In a recent decision issued by Taylor J. in the case of McQuaid v. A.G. (Canada) & ors., 2009 PESC 40, he took the opportunity to set out what is meant and understood in law as constituting an action that is frivolous or vexatious or an abuse of the process of the court as those words are contained in Rule 21.01(3)(d). His summary at paras. 29 to 42 of his decision provide a useful review. He noted that a frivolous action by definition was one lacking a legal basis or legal merit; one that is not serious; one that is not reasonably purposeful. He found a “frivolous suit” defined as one having no legal basis, often filed to harass or extort money from the defendant. He noted cases dealing with “frivolous” and sometimes “frivolous and vexatious” ask whether there is a serious question to be tried or a real prospect of succeeding.