Gregory William James Robson

The plaintiff, Penalta Group Ltd., brought a motion to extend deadlines for serving expert reports and setting the action down for trial, following a previous order that set aside an administrative dismissal for delay.

The defendant American Buildings Company opposed the motion, arguing for automatic reinstatement of the dismissal.

The court granted the extension for setting the action down for trial to November 3, 2022, and partially granted the extension for expert reports, specifically for Mr. Hartog's report to July 30, 2022.

However, a further extension for an additional expert report was denied due to insufficient evidence that an expert had been retained or how long it would take.

The court also granted leave for the plaintiff to continue the motion after serving the trial record.

The defendant Bradley Gray moved for partial summary judgment to dismiss all claims and cross-claims against him arising from a motor vehicle accident.

The plaintiffs, Braden Moxam and Lisa Moxam, did not participate in the motion.

The co-defendants, John and Colleen Anderson, opposed the motion, having filed a cross-claim alleging Gray's negligence.

The court applied the enhanced powers under the Rules of Civil Procedure, as clarified by Hryniak v. Mauldin, to weigh evidence and evaluate credibility.

The court found that Gray, as the dominant driver, had acted reasonably and could not have avoided the collision caused by Anderson's failure to obey a stop sign.

Gray's motion for partial summary judgment was granted, dismissing all claims and cross-claims against him.

This costs endorsement follows a motion brought by House concerning the distribution of insurance proceeds, the application of the equitable doctrine of marshalling, and the garnishment of settlement funds.

The court had previously dismissed House's request for marshalling, ordered pro rata distribution of State Farm funds, and allowed House to garnish 20% of Baird's settlement.

Baird was deemed more successful than House on the garnishment issue and was entitled to costs.

The court awarded Baird $20,000 in partial indemnity costs, inclusive of HST and disbursements, but excluded costs for an affiant who did not act as counsel or make submissions.

In a motor vehicle personal injury action, the defendants brought a motion requiring the plaintiff to attend a further independent medical examination by a psychiatrist after several prior defence examinations had already been conducted.

The defence argued the examination was necessary following a neuropsychologist’s suggestion that the plaintiff’s symptoms might reflect a conversion disorder.

The court held that the defendants already possessed extensive medical evidence from numerous specialists and that the proposed examination appeared aimed at developing a new diagnostic theory rather than responding to an issue requiring further investigation.

The evidentiary basis for the additional psychiatric examination was insufficient, and the request risked becoming a fishing expedition.

Given the number of prior examinations and the intrusive nature of another assessment, the motion was dismissed.