The appellants appealed a motion judge's order dismissing their motion to strike a jury notice and granting the respondent's motion for late delivery of a jury notice in a consolidated action involving a denied life insurance claim.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the motion judge properly considered the test for late jury notices, including the circumstances of delay and lack of prejudice.
The Court also upheld the finding that the respondent's claim, while framed as seeking a declaration of entitlement to a $400,000 death benefit, was in pith and substance a claim for monetary damages, and therefore a jury notice was permissible.
