The plaintiff sought leave, after the action had been set down for trial, to bring motions to disqualify a defence medical expert for alleged conflict and to remove defence counsel for alleged improper disclosure.
Applying the post-set-down leave test, the court held there was no substantial or unexpected change in circumstances and no manifest injustice warranting further interlocutory motions.
The court found the moving party knew or ought to have known of the alleged conflict before consenting to the examination, and did not raise the issue in a timely manner.
The court further held the high threshold for removal of counsel was not met on the evidentiary record.
Leave to bring both proposed motions was denied.
