In a personal injury action set down for trial, the defendant sought to compel the plaintiff to attend a neurological defence medical examination, which would have been the sixth defence medical assessment.
The court held that because the action had already been placed on the trial list with the defendant’s consent, leave under Rule 48.04(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure was required before initiating further discovery steps.
Leave had not been sought and, in any event, would not have been granted because the defendant failed to establish an evidentiary basis for an additional examination.
The court found no new or unexpected change in the plaintiff’s condition and emphasized proportionality, noting that the plaintiff had already undergone multiple defence examinations and had not served any new neurological report.
The motion was dismissed and costs were awarded to the plaintiff.
