During a Trial Management Conference in a construction lien dispute, sub‑trade lien claimants raised concerns that the municipality’s defence and counterclaim lacked sufficient particulars regarding alleged deficiencies and delays attributed to various sub‑trades.
The court considered the purpose of particulars in civil proceedings, namely to define issues, prevent surprise, and facilitate trial preparation.
Although the municipality argued that extensive disclosure had been provided during discovery, the court held that the information must be presented coherently and with sufficient specificity.
The municipality was ordered to provide written particulars detailing the alleged deficiencies and delays, even where costs had not yet been incurred.
