In a medical malpractice action, the defendant physician sought summary judgment on the basis that the plaintiffs' expert was unqualified to give opinion evidence in Ontario.
A dispute arose at case conference over the sequencing of expert evidence and the production of experts for cross-examination.
The court held the matter was not ripe for determination because the precise issues and evidentiary record for the proposed summary judgment motion remained unclear, including whether expert evidence would ultimately be relied upon.
The court emphasized that once an issue is put forward for summary judgment, each side must have a fair opportunity to adduce and test relevant evidence, subject to the court's proportionality and case-management powers.
