The defendants, a lawyer and his law firm, brought a summary judgment motion seeking the dismissal of a professional negligence action.
They argued the action was statute-barred, lacked expert evidence on negligence, and lacked evidence on damages.
The court dismissed the motion, finding genuine issues for trial regarding the existence and nature of the solicitor-client relationship, whether a duty of care was breached by failing to disclose environmental and archaeological reports, and the discoverability of the claim for limitation purposes.
The court also addressed the evidentiary burden on summary judgment motions, particularly concerning expert evidence in professional negligence cases, and reconciled conflicting Court of Appeal decisions.
