The defendants brought a motion seeking an order to compel the plaintiff to attend three defence medical assessments and for leave to serve defence expert reports late, after failing to comply with the timelines mandated by Rule 53.03 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court dismissed the motion, finding that the defendants failed to provide a "reasonable explanation" for their non-compliance, as required by Rule 53.08.
The court emphasized that administrative failures or inattentiveness by counsel or staff do not constitute a reasonable explanation for such delays.