The defendant moving party sought to set aside a noting in default after failing to deliver a timely notice of intent to defend or statement of defence in a civil action over allegedly erroneous credit-report entries.
Applying rr. 19.03(1) and the discretionary framework in appellate authority, the court emphasized determination on the merits, contextual balancing, and prejudice analysis rather than technical default consequences.
The court found the delay was not significant, was explained by an internal service-date mistake, and was followed by prompt steps to investigate and engage opposing counsel.
The plaintiff filed no affidavit evidence of non-compensable prejudice.
The motion was granted and the noting in default was set aside.
