Fraser Chorley

This motion addressed three discovery-related issues: production of information concerning other employees of the defendant V&N GTA Landscaping Inc. (GTA), production of GTA's policy of insurance, and setting aside a certificate of non-attendance obtained against the plaintiff.

The first two issues were resolved by agreement between the parties.

The court dismissed the plaintiff's motion to set aside the certificate of non-attendance, finding no prejudice to the plaintiff in attending discovery without prior surveillance information and that the agreed-upon discovery schedule did not entitle the plaintiff to complete all undertakings and refusals before her own examination.

The plaintiff, Lesley Ann Smith, brought a motion seeking an order validating service of the statement of claim on the defendant, Renee Elfassy, and extending the time to serve the claim.

The underlying action arose from an alleged trip and fall in 2016.

The statement of claim was issued in 2018, but Ms. Elfassy was not served until 2022.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the plaintiff failed to make reasonable efforts to locate and serve Ms. Elfassy within the prescribed period or in the subsequent years.

The court also found that the delay was not adequately explained and that the plaintiff failed to rebut the presumed and actual prejudice to Ms. Elfassy caused by the delay.

The plaintiff brought a motion under Rule 34.15 to compel the defendant to answer undertakings and refusals from an examination for discovery arising from a single-vehicle accident.

The court ordered the defendant to answer questions regarding pre-accident health based on an unconditional agreement between counsel.

However, the court dismissed the request to compel answers regarding the defendant's post-accident statements, finding that the questions were directed solely to credibility rather than obtaining facts, applying the Divisional Court's reasoning in Sangaralingam.