Paul Bremner

In a trial concerning art authentication, the intervenors brought a mid-trial motion to qualify an expert in graphoanalysis and forensic analysis of handwriting.

The plaintiff objected due to the late service of the expert report.

The court granted the motion, noting that while the late service violated the Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff had prior access to the report online and was not unduly prejudiced.

Applying Rule 1.04(1), the court prioritized the merits of the case over procedural formality and qualified the expert.

During a trial concerning the authenticity of a Norval Morrisseau painting, the intervenors brought a motion to qualify an art appraiser as an expert witness.

The plaintiff objected based on the proposed expert's lack of academic credentials, past business dealings with an intervenor, and the inadequacy of his expert report.

The court found that the appraiser's 43 years of industry experience was sufficient for qualification and that his past business dealings did not undermine his impartiality.

However, the court refused to qualify the expert because his one-page report was merely a conclusory certificate lacking methodology or reasoning, and it was served the day before his testimony, which would cause unfair surprise and prejudice to the plaintiff under Rule 53.03.