2 total
Motion to adjourn trial dismissed as allegations of expert misconduct lacked evidence and relied on inadmissible prior findings.
The plaintiffs brought a motion to adjourn the trial of a motor vehicle accident claim, alleging serious misconduct and fraud by the defendant's medical expert and defence counsel.
The plaintiffs sought time to investigate these claims and introduce prior tribunal and judicial findings against the expert.
The court dismissed the motion, finding no evidentiary basis for the allegations and noting that prior tribunal decisions and judicial comments on the expert's credibility are inadmissible in the civil trial.
The court held that an adjournment would cause undue delay and prejudice the administration of justice.
The court allowed the plaintiffs to add a winter maintenance company as a defendant, finding the claim was brought within two years of discoverability.
The plaintiffs, Yael Rush and Thomas Rush, brought a motion to add Total Facility Solutions (TFS), a winter maintenance company, as a defendant to their slip and fall action against Via Rail Canada Inc. The primary issue was whether the proposed claim against TFS was barred by the two-year limitation period under the Limitations Act, 2002.
The court found that the plaintiffs could not have reasonably discovered the material facts necessary to plead against TFS until December 23, 2014, when Via Rail's Statement of Defence identified TFS.
As the notice of motion to add TFS was served on December 19, 2016, the claim was deemed to be within the two-year limitation period.
The court also confirmed that the doctrine of special circumstances no longer applies to extend limitation periods under the new Act.
The motion was allowed, adding TFS as a defendant, without prejudice to TFS raising a limitations defence.
Costs were awarded to the plaintiffs.
