The appellant brought a motion to admit fresh evidence on an appeal involving claims of false arrest and Charter breaches.
The proposed evidence included correspondence, expert reports, and training manuals.
The Divisional Court applied the Sengmueller test and found that the evidence was either not fresh, not relevant, or could have been obtained with reasonable diligence prior to trial.
The motion was dismissed, although the factum from the court below was accepted to show the arguments made due to a tape erasure.