The court denied the respondents' motion for leave under Rule 39 to deliver an expert report on Israeli law in a recognition and enforcement application.
The decision reviews the procedural history, the applicable test for leave under Rule 39.02(2), and finds that the respondents failed to satisfy any of the criteria for leave.
The court held that the expert report was not relevant, did not respond to a matter raised on cross-examination, would cause non-compensable prejudice, and was not adequately explained as to its late delivery.
The application was adjourned to March 27, 2025, and directions were given for the delivery of amended factums.
