B. Leatherdale

The defendant in a motor vehicle accident claim brought a motion for production of police and Ministry of the Attorney General files relating to withdrawn criminal charges against the plaintiff for possession of stolen property and fraud.

The action had already been set down for trial.

The court denied leave under Rule 48.04, finding no substantial and unexpected change in circumstances, as the charges were discoverable long before the trial record was filed.

The court also held that the motion would fail under Rule 30.10 because the criminal files were not relevant to the civil action and there was no unfairness in the extensive discovery already conducted.

The defendant brought a motion for the production of the plaintiff's bank records from May 2009 to the present.

The plaintiff, a sole proprietor claiming significant economic loss following a motor vehicle accident, opposed the motion on the basis that he had already produced ledgers and tax records.

The court found the bank statements were relevant to verify the plaintiff's pre-accident income and test the adjustments made by his economic loss expert.

Applying the principle of proportionality, the court ordered the production of the bank statements, with the defendant to reimburse the plaintiff for the cost of obtaining them.