The defendants brought a motion seeking dismissal or a stay of an Ontario action arising from a landslide at a Costa Rican gold mine, arguing that Costa Rica or Colorado was the more appropriate forum under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.
The court applied the principles articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Club Resorts Ltd. v. Van Breda and Breeden v. Black.
While the moving defendants established certain connections between the dispute and the proposed foreign forums, they provided little evidence regarding the characteristics of those forums or how litigation there would be fairer or more efficient.
The court held that merely identifying geographical connections and residence locations was insufficient to meet the burden of demonstrating that an alternative forum was clearly more appropriate.
As the evidentiary record did not establish that either Colorado or Costa Rica was better positioned to resolve the dispute, the motion was dismissed.
