Noorain Shethwala

The plaintiff, a former high school student, brought an action for damages against her former music teacher, Royce Galon Williamson, for sexual abuse, and against the Trillium Lakelands District School Board (the School Board) for vicarious liability and direct negligence/breach of fiduciary duty.

Williamson did not attend the trial, and his statement of defence was struck.

The court found Williamson liable for sexual assault, battery, and breach of fiduciary duty.

The School Board was found vicariously liable for Williamson's conduct and directly liable for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty due to its inadequate response to the plaintiff's disclosure, including failure to provide support and immediately remove Williamson from the school.

Damages were awarded for general and aggravated damages, loss of competitive advantage, past and future care expenses, and punitive damages against Williamson.

The plaintiffs brought a motion seeking leave to exceed the seven-hour limit for examination for discovery of the defendants' representative and an order allowing them to move without notice to strike the statement of defence for non-compliance with undertakings.

The court granted leave for an additional four hours of examination, exceeding the seven-hour limit by 2.4 hours, citing the voluminous additional productions and numerous undertakings.

However, the court denied the request to move without notice to strike the defence, emphasizing that striking a defence is an extreme remedy and defendants should have notice and an opportunity to respond to such a motion.

The plaintiff, Drake Holdings Ltd., brought a motion seeking a declaration that four inadvertently disclosed documents were solicitor-client privileged and an order removing the defendant's counsel, Lerners LLP.

The defendant, Chubb Insurance Company of Canada, argued that the documents were not privileged, or that privilege was waived, and opposed counsel's removal.

The court found the documents were privileged and that privilege was not waived or lost.

While acknowledging a presumption of prejudice, the court determined that remedies short of removing counsel were sufficient to protect the privilege, including orders for the return/deletion of documents, an undertaking from counsel not to relay information, and a prohibition on counsel conducting examinations of the plaintiff's witnesses.