Megan Mah

The defendant brought a motion to compel the plaintiff to deliver copies of his schedule A productions and to attend an examination for discovery.

The plaintiff sought an adjournment due to late service of the motion materials, which was denied given the age of the 2015 action and the need to move it forward.

The court rejected the plaintiff's arguments that the motion was premature, that the defendant had waived its right to discovery, or that a notice of examination was required.

The plaintiff was ordered to provide electronic copies of his productions and attend an examination for discovery.

The defendants brought a motion to strike a paragraph from the plaintiff's Reply and Defence to Counterclaim under Rule 25.11.

The plaintiff, a dentist, sued her former employer for wrongful dismissal and discrimination, alleging a pattern of discriminatory conduct against female employees.

In her Reply, she alleged a broader pattern of spurious allegations against any employee who left the practice.

The court found the impugned paragraph was a bald statement without supporting facts, overly broad, and amounted to a fishing expedition that would prejudice and delay the fair trial of the action.

The motion was granted and the paragraph was struck without leave to amend.

The plaintiff brought a motion seeking to amend his statement of claim to include constructive dismissal allegations, specific document productions, withdrawal of a jury notice, and dispensation from mandatory mediation.

The court partially granted leave to amend the statement of claim, allowing some new paragraphs while denying others deemed irrelevant or vexatious.

Specific document productions were largely ordered, including the HR file, EI decision, and relevant Executive Committee minutes, but a prosecutorial viability opinion was deemed privileged.

The motion to withdraw the jury notice was granted, but the request to dispense with mandatory mediation was denied.