CITATION: Nadeau v. Haws, 2020 ONSC 4826

COURT FILE NO.: 131/20 130/20 (Brampton)

DATE: 20200811

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - DIVISIONAL COURT - ONTARIO

RE: Nadeau v. Haws

BEFORE: D.L. Corbett J.

COUNSEL: Michael A. Prosia for the Moving Parties Haws Jeffrey Shinehoft for the Respondent Plaintiffs No one appearing, for CBRE and HMQ Marco Petrovic, for the Moving Party SP Plus No one appearing, for Wilcox Door Service No one appearing, for Installation Plus Inc.

DATE: August 11, 2020

CASE MANAGEMENT ENDORSEMENT

[1] This endorsement reflects a case management teleconference held on August 11, 2020.

[2] These two motions for leave to appeal, brought by SP Plus Corporation Canada and Haws Doors and Hardware Ltd. and Haws Overhead Doors Ltd., both from the decision of Emery J. (2020 ONSC 1150) shall proceed together in writing before a panel of three judges of the Divisional Court during the week of November 16, 2020 or as soon thereafter as they may be read.

[3] The Moving Parties shall endeavour to deliver a joint record, to avoid unnecessary duplication of materials in the two motions for leave to appeal.

[4] The moving parties’ materials shall serve all of the motion materials by September 25, 2020. The responding parties’ materials shall be served by October 30, 2020.

[5] Counsel for Haws shall provide a password-protected download-only drop box from which materials may be downloaded and shall provide the court with the URL and password by November 6, 2020.

(a) All documents shall be uploaded to the drop box in pdf format.

(b) Documents should be labelled in a manner that identifies them clearly for members of the panel so that it is not necessary to open the document to understand what it is. Pages should be numbered sequentially within each pdf. If this is not practical, given the current state of the documents, then individual documents should be uploaded to the drop box in pdf form, so that each document is clearly labelled, enabling the court to find documents quickly.

(c) Factums are to be filed in both Word and pdf formats. Where possible, factums should contain hyperlinks for authorities and, if possible, hyperlinks to a “Factum Compendium”, described below.

(d) Books of authorities containing the full text of authorities should not be uploaded to the drop box. However, citations to cases in the factums are to provide, if possible, a hyperlink to the online version of cases. The only exceptions to this principle are authorities not available online, such as excerpts from textbooks, foreign law, or Canadian decisions not reported online: these should be collected in a small brief of unreported authorities and filed in the drop box.

(e) Parties may file a “Factum Compendium” containing single pages or brief portions of cases cited, and brief portions of evidence from the record referenced in the factum, hyperlinked from the factum. Where portions of cases are included in a compendium, the title of proceedings and headnote should be included as well. Where portions of the record are included in a Factum Compendium, the first page of the document and identification of where it may be found in the record should also be provided.

(f) The parties shall file their agreement on the disposition of costs, or, if the parties have not agreed as to costs, then each party shall file its bill of costs, costs outline and any brief supporting materials relied upon in respect to costs.

(g) All parties are permitted to (but are not required to) file the following additional documents (in addition to documents permitted under the Rules): a Factum Compendium, described above.

[6] Parties are required to file one paper copy of any document filed for the hearing that previously has not been filed with the court in paper form, once the suspension of ordinary court operations is lifted, and to pay any applicable court fees.

[7] Counsel did not expect Installation Plus or Wilcox Door to participate in this teleconference or in the motion for leave to appeal. Counsel did expect that CBRE and HMQ would participate. All parties are bound by the schedule established by the court in this endorsement. If any party objects to the schedule and the process for establishing the schedule, that party should arrange a further case management teleconference with this court immediately.

[8] The court has endorsed its fiat on this endorsement this day; the unsigned version distributed to the parties today has the authority and effect of the signed version, a copy of which will be provided to the parties in due course after the suspension of ordinary court operations is lifted.

D.L. Corbett J.

Date: August 11, 2020