Christopher R. Martyr

The defendants, George and Huguette Blechta, brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss an action for damages brought by James and Margherite Derro.

The action stemmed from James Derro's fall on the Blechtas' icy driveway, with Margherite Derro claiming under the Family Law Act.

The court applied the two-stage summary judgment test, finding no genuine issue requiring a trial.

It concluded that the Blechtas had acted reasonably in their driveway maintenance and that James Derro had willingly assumed the risks by exiting his truck on the un-sanded driveway.

The motion was granted, and the action was dismissed.

The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident while a passenger in a car driven by the defendant driver.

The vehicle was owned by the driver's mother, who had explicitly refused permission for him to drive it.

The mother and her insurer brought motions for summary judgment to dismiss the action against them on the basis that the vehicle was taken without consent.

The court found that the driver had never taken the car before, the mother had hidden the keys, and there was no implied consent.

The motions for summary judgment were granted and the action against the owner and insurer was dismissed.

The Plaintiff brought a motion to provisionally strike the Defendant's jury notice, citing significant delays in civil jury trials due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the prioritization of criminal jury trials following R. v. Jordan.

The Plaintiff argued that further delay would cause irredeemable prejudice, including increasing statutory deductibles, reduced income recovery, and the need to update expert reports.

The court granted the motion, provisionally striking the jury notice to allow the matter to proceed as a judge-alone trial in the upcoming sittings, finding that justice to the parties would be better served by an expeditious resolution.

The Defendant was granted liberty to move to restore the jury notice if the trial was not reached by a specified date.

The plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident claim moved to strike the defendant's jury notice, arguing that the COVID-19 pandemic created uncertainty about when in-person jury trials could proceed.

The court granted leave to bring the motion but dismissed it as premature.

The court noted that the case was not yet trial-ready, having not been pre-tried and with a recent medical report served.

Following a wait-and-see approach preferred in the Central East Region, the court held that the motion could be renewed if in-person hearings were suspended again or if the action was not scheduled for trial by April 1, 2021.