The plaintiff sought leave to appeal an interlocutory order dismissing a motion to compel answers and document production arising from a cross‑examination on an affidavit filed in a class proceeding certification motion.
The underlying dispute concerned whether defendants were required to answer questions relating to a proposed statutory cause of action under Part XXIII.I of the Ontario Securities Act when the affidavit had been filed only for purposes of certification under the Class Proceedings Act.
Applying Rule 62.02(4) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court held that leave to appeal requires either conflicting authority or good reason to doubt the correctness of the order, together with sufficient importance of the issue.
The court found neither conflicting decisions nor any basis to doubt the motion judge’s ruling that the refused questions were irrelevant to the certification motion.
Leave to appeal was therefore denied.