Corey Groper

The third party brought a motion to vary the court's reasons for judgment on a previous motion, seeking to remove adverse credibility findings made against him.

The third party argued he was taken by surprise by the credibility attack and had not attended the original motion to provide his explanation.

The court dismissed the motion to vary, finding that the credibility issue was squarely raised in the evidentiary record, specifically during the third party's Rule 39 examination where he was confronted with evidence of an undisclosed commission.

The court held that the findings were not an accidental slip or based on newly discovered facts under Rule 59.06.

The moving party, a car dealer, sought to set aside an interlocutory injunction preventing the transfer of a $1.5 million Ford GT 'super car'.

The plaintiffs alleged the moving party participated in a civil conspiracy to circumvent a 24-month restriction on the vehicle's resale.

The court dismissed the motion, finding no new facts or unforeseen change in circumstances since the injunction was granted, and held that the conspiracy claim raised triable issues inappropriate for determination on a motion to set aside an injunction.

On a threshold motion under s. 267.5 of the Insurance Act, the court held that the plaintiff established permanent serious impairment of an important physical, mental or psychological function arising from a rear-end motor vehicle collision.

The evidence supported a finding that a whiplash injury led to permanent debilitating chronic pain requiring regular injections and strong medication, notwithstanding pre-existing pain, anxiety, and depression.

The court also held that the medical report complied in substance with s. 4.3(4) of Regulation 461/96 even though it did not recite the regulation's exact wording.

The plaintiff was therefore entitled to recover non-pecuniary damages subject to the statutory deductible and the jury verdict.