In complex multi-party litigation involving competing applications and actions, the moving parties sought advance production of documents prior to cross‑examinations on affidavits and before the close of pleadings.
The court rejected the argument that counsel had reached a binding agreement requiring early documentary production and held that no such agreement existed.
The court further held that under the Rules of Civil Procedure, affidavits of documents are generally not required until after pleadings close, absent exceptional circumstances where production is essential to plead.
Motions to disqualify counsel were not equivalent to summary judgment proceedings and therefore did not justify early disclosure.
The court denied the request for advance production and issued directions governing examinations and interim injunctive relief pending further motions.
