C. Pendrith

The plaintiffs brought a motion seeking an order to continue the examination for discovery of the defendant's representative for a further 4.5 days, while the defendant submitted that only one further day was appropriate.

The action involves claims of defamation and intentional interference with economic relations.

The case management judge found the motion to be a waste of the court's time and ordered a compromise of two additional days (12 hours) of discovery, noting the parties had previously consented to exceed the seven-hour limit under Rule 31.05.1.

The plaintiffs' request regarding a Request to Admit was deemed moot as the defendant had delivered a compliant response prior to the hearing.

The defendants moved to strike or stay the Canadian action brought against them by the plaintiffs, arguing it was an abuse of process or should be stayed due to a parallel U.S. action commenced by related plaintiffs against related defendants.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the U.S. action involved different defendants, different causes of action, different laws, and different jurisdictions.

The court held that the plaintiffs' conduct was not vexatious or oppressive, and the defendants failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice to justify a permanent or temporary stay.

A dispute arose during a passing of accounts over whether funds held in joint bank accounts between a deceased parent and two adult children formed part of the estate.

The accounts were opened with rights of survivorship and funded exclusively by the deceased.

Applying the principles in Pecore v. Pecore, the court considered evidence of intention, bank documentation, control of funds, tax treatment, and surrounding circumstances.

The court held that the presumption of resulting trust was rebutted because the deceased intended to gift the beneficial interest in the joint accounts inter vivos.

The evidence further supported that the surviving joint account holders were to distribute the funds equally among all siblings, either as direct beneficiaries or through a bare trust.

The funds therefore did not form part of the estate.