2 total
The court exercised its discretion to override the standard order of discovery to ensure efficiency in a complex multi-party action.
The court considered a motion by Royal Protective Services Inc. to compel Daniella and Shawn Leis to attend examinations for discovery before other parties in a complex, multi-party action arising from a motor vehicle accident.
The court found that Daniella and her father were the only parties with direct knowledge of the essential facts and ordered that they be examined first, rejecting the Leis defendants' reliance on the technical order of examinations under Rule 31.04(3).
Costs were awarded to the moving party on a partial indemnity basis.
Appeal allowed and new LAT hearing ordered where unrepresented appellant was denied procedural fairness.
The appellant, a pedestrian injured in a car accident, appealed the Licence Appeal Tribunal's denial of her request to adjourn a hearing regarding her catastrophic impairment designation.
The adjournment was sought due to a breakdown in her solicitor-client relationship on the eve of the hearing.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding that the appellant was denied procedural fairness as she demonstrated a complete inability to represent herself at the complex hearing.
The matter was remitted to the LAT for a new hearing on the merits.
