A. Cameron

The plaintiffs brought a motion for a status hearing under Rule 48.14(5) to show cause why their action, initiated in 2011 for copyright infringement, should not be dismissed for delay.

The court examined the plaintiffs' explanation for the 5.5-year delay, which included extensive settlement discussions and a change of counsel, and the defendants' claim of non-compensable prejudice.

The Master found that the plaintiffs provided an acceptable explanation for most of the delay, with any minor unexplained period partly attributable to the defendants' own inaction.

Furthermore, the defendants failed to demonstrate non-compensable prejudice resulting from the plaintiffs' delay.

Consequently, the motion was granted, the action was allowed to proceed, and a timetable for setting the action down for trial by September 30, 2018, was ordered.

Case management was deemed unwarranted at that time.

Following the release of reasons for decision in a civil proceeding, counsel alerted the court to misstatements contained in several paragraphs of the judgment.

The court reviewed the concerns raised in correspondence and agreed that errors existed in the previously released reasons.

The judge confirmed that the misstatements had not been identified despite multiple proofreadings prior to release.

The court ordered that the errors be corrected and that a corrected version of the reasons be circulated to counsel.

The plaintiff brought an action against his neighbour for nuisance, negligence, and strict liability, alleging that the neighbour's dumping of thousands of truckloads of fill, alteration of drainage, and failure to maintain a culvert caused extensive and continuous flooding on the plaintiff's property.

The court found the defendant liable under all three causes of action, noting the defendant's conduct was high-handed and reprehensible.

The court awarded the plaintiff $250,000 for loss of use and enjoyment, $15,000 for property damage, and $125,000 in punitive damages.

The court also issued a mandatory injunction requiring the defendant to rectify the drainage issues and dismissed the defendant's counterclaims as utterly without merit.