During a negligence trial concerning alleged diesel fuel contamination of lands belonging to a First Nation, the defendants brought a mid‑trial motion seeking to disqualify the plaintiff’s proposed expert geoscientist.
The defendants argued the expert report failed to comply with Rule 53.03 of the Rules of Civil Procedure because it was not prepared for the litigation and did not clearly set out the issues, opinions, and bases for those opinions.
The court held that the report was only minimally compliant with Rule 53.03 and did not sufficiently identify the substance of the proposed expert testimony, thereby prejudicing the defendants’ ability to prepare for trial.
However, completely barring the witness from testifying would be too harsh.
The court granted leave for the witness to testify as a fact witness, subject to strict limits on use of the report and possible supplementation.
