A. McBride

The defendants brought a motion for summary judgment dismissing a personal injury claim arising from a motor vehicle collision on the basis that the plaintiff was operating an uninsured vehicle.

The defendants relied on s. 267.6(1) of the Insurance Act and evidence indicating the vehicle was not insured and not properly registered to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff argued that his proof of insurance was destroyed in a post‑collision fire and that his memory loss prevented him from identifying his insurer.

The court held the defendants established a prima facie case that the plaintiff was uninsured and that the plaintiff failed to produce evidence capable of showing a genuine issue for trial.

As a result, the statutory bar against recovery applied and the claim was dismissed on summary judgment.

The defendant sought leave under Rule 48.04 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to proceed with a previously served motion for summary judgment after the parties had consented to place the action on the trial list.

The underlying action involved claims of negligence and breach of contract relating to allegedly improper industrial laundry systems and advice.

The court held that once parties consent to placing an action on the trial list, further motions require leave and such leave should only be granted where justified in the interests of justice.

The moving party had not notified the opposing party or the trial coordinator of its intention to continue the summary judgment motion when consenting to the trial listing, and there was no substantial change in circumstances warranting leave.

The court therefore refused leave and dismissed the motion.