2 total
Plaintiff awarded $3,500 in costs for a necessary but overbroad refusals motion.
The plaintiff sought costs of $13,983.34 on a partial indemnity scale following a motion to compel answers to undertakings and refusals, and a dismissed motion to examine a second representative.
The defendant sought costs of $26,144.52.
The court found the refusals motion was necessary to progress the litigation, but noted the plaintiff's requests were overbroad.
Balancing the divided success and the conduct of both parties, the court awarded the plaintiff costs fixed at $3,500.
Insurer ordered to answer specific discovery questions regarding other staged water claims but second examination denied.
The plaintiff brought a motion to compel the defendant insurer to answer refusals from an examination for discovery and for leave to examine a second representative.
The action arose from the defendant's denial of the plaintiff's water loss claim on the basis that it was staged.
The plaintiff sought extensive disclosure regarding other similar claims denied by the defendant involving members of the same ethnic community, alleging racial profiling and bad faith.
The court ordered the defendant to produce its template denial letter and answer specific questions regarding any connection between the plaintiff's claim and the other claims.
However, the court denied the plaintiff's overbroad requests for the entire investigative files of the other claims, as the defendant was not relying on a conspiracy defence.
The court also dismissed the plaintiff's request to examine a second representative, finding the first representative was not uninformed or evasive.
