Kerry Nash

The plaintiffs brought a motion to set aside a Registrar's Order dismissing their action for delay.

The action arose from an unpaid loan of $36,300 allegedly secured by a second mortgage handled by the defendant lawyer.

The plaintiffs experienced multiple issues with their legal representation, leading to the dismissal.

Applying the four-part test from Reid v. Dow Corning Corp., the court found the plaintiffs' explanation and promptness tenuous but prioritized the litigants' rights over their counsel's conduct.

Finding no significant prejudice to the defendant, the court set aside the dismissal on strict terms and awarded costs to the defendant in the cause.

The appellant filed a police misconduct complaint under the Police Services Act and commenced a parallel civil action for damages arising from the same arrest.

After the disciplinary hearing officer found the officers not guilty, the respondents successfully moved to strike the civil claims on the basis of issue estoppel.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a 4-3 decision, allowed the appeal, holding that while no public policy rule should categorically exclude police disciplinary hearings from issue estoppel, the Court of Appeal erred in its discretionary analysis by failing to consider the significant differences in purpose, scope, and stakes between the two proceedings, the parties' reasonable expectations, and the unfairness of permitting the Chief of Police's designate's decision to exonerate the Chief from civil liability.