The plaintiff moved under Rule 59.06(2) to vary a prior timetable order and obtain additional time to ready a property transfer action for trial.
Applying by analogy the factors used on motions to set aside a registrar’s dismissal order, the court considered the explanation for delay, inadvertence, delay in bringing the motion, and prejudice.
The court accepted that serious mental health and addiction issues, language barriers, changes in counsel, and improved current supports provided a satisfactory explanation and amounted to exceptional circumstances.
Finding no evidence of prejudice to the defendants, the court granted a final timetable extension, dispensed with mandatory mediation, and ordered no costs.
