R. Campbell

The applicants sought leave to appeal an arbitral award that dismissed their claims against former employees for breach of a non-solicitation clause and breach of confidence.

The applicants alleged the arbitrator committed several errors of law, including finding that responding to a Request for Proposal did not constitute solicitation and failing to find a breach of confidence.

The court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal, finding that the alleged errors were either questions of mixed fact and law or not errors of law, and would not significantly affect the rights of the parties.

In a slip and fall personal injury action, the defendant brought a refusals motion seeking answers to discovery questions and production of medical and accident-related records.

The court applied the relevance test under Rule 31.06(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure and emphasized that discovery must be confined to matters relevant to the pleadings and not constitute a fishing expedition.

The court limited several requests for historical medical information to five years pre‑accident and upheld certain refusals where the requested information lacked relevance to the pleaded injuries.

However, the court ordered disclosure of documents relating to a prior motor vehicle accident to assess potential overlap of damages and avoid double recovery.

Both parties achieved mixed success and no costs were awarded.