Category Archives: Practice and Procedure

Pleadings, discovery and other issues involving the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Clarification of Jurisdiction of Masters On Motions for Summary Judgment in Wake of C.A.’s Decision in Combined Air

Posted on March 20, 2012 by Stephen Cavanagh

I”ve just come from a motion before Master Calum MacLeod, where he provided to me and to opposing counsel a copy of his reasons in 90 George St. v. Reliance Construction, 2012 ONSC 1171 (CanLII). Upon returning to my office however, … Continue reading →

Posted in Practice and Procedure | Comments Off on Clarification of Jurisdiction of Masters On Motions for Summary Judgment in Wake of C.A.’s Decision in Combined Air

Justice Brown Lambastes Provincial Government’s “Poor Excuse of A System” for Document Management

Posted on March 16, 2012 by Stephen Cavanagh

I don’t often burst out laughing when reading reasons for judgment (tears are more likely), but today’s offering from Justice David M. Brown was an exception. In Romspen Investment Corporation v. 6176666 Canada Ltée, His Honour was riding one of his … Continue reading →

Posted in Litigation Technology, Practice and Procedure | Comments Off on Justice Brown Lambastes Provincial Government’s “Poor Excuse of A System” for Document Management

Master MacLeod Discusses Appropriate Procedure In Undertakings Motions

Posted on March 7, 2012 by Stephen Cavanagh

Kariouk v. Pombo was a motion by the plaintiff to compel plaintiffs to answer undertakings given in the course of examinations for discovery. A commonplace type of motion, to be sure. But it is because such motions occur so frequently … Continue reading →

Posted in Costs, Discovery, Practice and Procedure | Comments Off on Master MacLeod Discusses Appropriate Procedure In Undertakings Motions

Plaintiff Given Leave to Examine Defendant Under Rule 39.03 On Rule 25.11 Motion to Strike Statement of Claim

Posted on March 2, 2012 by Stephen Cavanagh

Khan v. Lee is an interesting decision of Master Joan Haberman. In this medical malpractice action, the defendant doctor had moved, under Rules 21.01 and 25.11, to strike the statement of claim. He filed no evidence on the motion. Counsel … Continue reading →

Posted in Pleadings, Practice and Procedure, Professional Liability | Comments Off on Plaintiff Given Leave to Examine Defendant Under Rule 39.03 On Rule 25.11 Motion to Strike Statement of Claim

Leave to Appeal to Divisional Court Granted Concerning Applicable Test for Examination for Discovery of Second Deponent

Posted on February 21, 2012 by Stephen Cavanagh

Fortini v. Simcoe (County), 2012 ONSC 1034 (CanLII) is an interesting case in which Madam Justice Susan E. Healey granted leave to appeal an order of Madam Justice Anne Mullins, requiring that the appellant (defendant) produce a second deponent for … Continue reading →

Posted in Discovery, Practice and Procedure | Comments Off on Leave to Appeal to Divisional Court Granted Concerning Applicable Test for Examination for Discovery of Second Deponent

Brown J. Discusses Waiver of Privilege

Posted on February 21, 2012 by Stephen Cavanagh

In Ebrahim v. Continental Precious Minerals, 2012 ONSC 1123 (CanLII), Mr. Justice David M. Brown undertook a fairly comprehensive analysis of the circumstances in which both lawyer-client privilege and litigation privilege will be found to have been waived. The discussion arose … Continue reading →

Posted in Evidence, Experts and Opinions, Privilege | Comments Off on Brown J. Discusses Waiver of Privilege

Master Dash Orders Defendants to Produce Proportionate Liability Sharing Agreement

Posted on February 18, 2012 by Stephen Cavanagh

Master Ronald Dash has ordered that a secret agreement, entered into by defendants and a third-party in Moore v. Bertuzzi, 2012 ONSC 597 (CanLII), must be disclosed to the plaintiffs. In his reasons, the master undertook a comprehensive review of … Continue reading →

Posted in Discovery, Practice and Procedure, Privilege | Comments Off on Master Dash Orders Defendants to Produce Proportionate Liability Sharing Agreement

C.A. Strikes Down Award of Compound Interest on Fee Charged by Opposing Party’s Expert

Posted on February 13, 2012 by Stephen Cavanagh

In Herbert v. Brantford (City), the Court of Appeal disallowed interest at one and two percent, compounded monthly, that had been awarded in relation to fees charged by the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses in a personal injury case. The Court said … Continue reading →

Posted in Costs, Practice and Procedure | Comments Off on C.A. Strikes Down Award of Compound Interest on Fee Charged by Opposing Party’s Expert

“Presumption” that Commercial Plaintiffs Entitled to Compound Interest?

Posted on September 1, 2011 by Stephen Cavanagh

We recently ran across an interesting decision of Mr. Justice Frank Newbould, dealing with the issue of whether prejudgment interest should be compounded. In Enbridge Gas. v. Michael Marinaccio et al, 2011 ONSC 4962 (CanLII), he held that it should be. … Continue reading →

Posted in Commercial Litigation, Contract, Damages, Practice and Procedure | Comments Off on “Presumption” that Commercial Plaintiffs Entitled to Compound Interest?

Surveillance Provided to IME Examiner Must Simultaneously Be Given to Plaintiff

Posted on September 1, 2011 by Stephen Cavanagh

In Aherne v. Chang, 2011 ONSC 3846 (CanLII), Mr. Justice Paul Perell decided an appeal from a decision of Master Short. The Master had ordered that if the defendants in a medical malpractice action were to require that the plaintiffs undergo … Continue reading →

Posted in Discovery | Comments Off on Surveillance Provided to IME Examiner Must Simultaneously Be Given to Plaintiff