F. Teixeira

The parties appeared in Civil Practice Court to seek a consent adjournment of the plaintiff's summary judgment motion because the defendants failed to complete cross-examinations by the court-ordered deadline.

The court granted the adjournment but issued an endorsement emphasizing the need for a 'culture shift' in civil litigation, criticizing the parties for ignoring the scheduling order and the defendants' counsel for attending court unprepared.

The court stressed that case management schedules are mandatory and parties must proactively seek amendments rather than letting deadlines pass.

The plaintiff brought an action for malicious prosecution after neighbours initiated private criminal charges alleging assault, mischief, and uttering death threats arising from a series of neighbourhood disputes.

The criminal charges were later withdrawn by the Crown after concerns they were being used to gain advantage in ongoing civil litigation.

The court applied the four-part test from Nelles v Ontario and found the defendants initiated the proceedings, the charges terminated in the plaintiff’s favour, there was no reasonable and probable cause, and the prosecution was motivated by an improper collateral purpose.

The court accepted the plaintiff’s evidence over the defendants’ and concluded the charges were laid maliciously.

General damages and reimbursement of legal fees incurred defending the criminal charges were awarded.