The plaintiffs brought a motion for a status hearing to extend the time to set down a 2016 action for trial and to timetable remaining litigation steps, arguing an acceptable explanation for delay and no non-compensable prejudice to the defendants.
The defendants, including Inez Antonio and the Nialund defendants (Gore Mutual Insurance Company and Nialund Properties Limited), opposed the motion, with Inez Antonio bringing a cross-motion to dismiss for delay.
The court granted the plaintiffs' motion, finding their explanation for delay adequate and the defendants' assertions of prejudice unsupported, noting the defendants' passivity in the litigation.
The cross-motion was dismissed.
