Alexander John Dayton Curry

In a civil jury trial, the plaintiff brought a motion seeking to question sworn jurors for potential bias relating to abortion after the jury panel had already been selected and sworn.

The plaintiff relied on survey evidence suggesting Canadians hold strong views on abortion and argued that questioning jurors was necessary to identify potential prejudice.

The court held that civil juries are presumed capable of setting aside personal views through the trial process and judicial instructions, and that there was insufficient evidence of widespread bias that would justify such questioning.

The court emphasized the discretionary nature of challenges for cause in civil proceedings and warned that permitting such questioning could create delays and open the floodgates to inquiries on many personal characteristics.

The motion was dismissed.

The plaintiff brought a motion under Rule 37.14 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to set aside a registrar’s order dismissing the action as abandoned under Rule 48.15 and to extend the time for service of the statement of claim.

The court reviewed the applicable principles governing motions to set aside administrative dismissal orders, including the Reid factors addressing explanation for delay, inadvertence, promptness of the motion, and prejudice to the defendant.

Although the plaintiff failed to provide satisfactory explanations for significant litigation delay and for the delay in bringing the motion, the court accepted that the missed deadline resulted from inadvertence and found that the plaintiff rebutted the presumption of prejudice despite the expiry of the limitation period.

Given the preference for resolving disputes on their merits and the absence of demonstrated actual prejudice to the defendants, the registrar’s dismissal order was set aside and the time for service extended.

The defendants were awarded costs of the motion.