3 total
Appeal allowed; paragraphs alleging abuse struck from pleadings as irrelevant to the contingency fee dispute.
The appellant law firm appealed a Master's order declining to strike out paragraphs from the respondent's Statement of Defence and Counterclaim, and awarding costs to the self-represented respondent.
The impugned paragraphs alleged abusive conduct by a partner of the firm.
The Superior Court allowed the appeal, finding the Master erred in law by failing to consider whether the paragraphs were relevant to the pleadings regarding a contingency fee agreement.
The court struck the paragraphs as irrelevant and set aside the costs award, allowing the parties to file written submissions on costs.
Summons to examine tribunal chair quashed as proposed questions were irrelevant or breached solicitor-client privilege.
The Ontario College of Trades moved to set aside an order refusing to quash a summons to witness issued by PowerServe to the Chair of the College's Electrician Ratio Review Panel.
PowerServe sought to examine the Chair regarding his prior professional relationship with a union involved in the review, alleging a reasonable apprehension of bias.
The Divisional Court allowed the motion and quashed the summons, finding that the proposed areas of inquiry were either irrelevant, amounted to a fishing expedition, or would require the disclosure of communications protected by solicitor-client privilege.
Court admonishes counsel for bypassing Commercial List urgent attendance procedures.
In complex commercial litigation involving a Mareva injunction motion, counsel attended the court without following the Commercial List’s procedure for requesting an urgent appointment.
The court emphasized that counsel must contact the Commercial List Office before appearing urgently before a judge and may not bypass the process by attending unannounced in an attempt to vary a prior order.
Although the parties agreed to adjourn the Mareva motion and vary certain procedural timelines, the court criticized the improper attendance and ruled that the plaintiffs would not be entitled to claim costs for the unnecessary appearances.
The court granted the adjournment on consent with modifications and provided further scheduling directions for cross-examinations and the motion return.
The interim injunction remained in effect pending the rescheduled hearing.
