3 total
Self-represented plaintiff granted medical accommodation to provide oral instead of written submissions for Rule 2.1.01 review.
The self-represented plaintiff's action was previously dismissed under Rule 2.1.01 with leave to amend.
After the plaintiff filed a Fresh Amended Statement of Claim, the defendants requested another Rule 2.1.01 review.
The court issued a notice that it was considering dismissing the action and required written submissions.
The plaintiff requested a medical accommodation to provide oral submissions instead, citing autism and difficulty writing.
Although the medical evidence was deficient, the court exercised its discretion under Rule 2.1.01(3) to allow the accommodation, finding no prejudice to the defendants.
The plaintiff was permitted to provide a 15-minute oral response.
Applications for judicial review of interlocutory labour arbitration decisions dismissed as premature.
The applicant union sought judicial review of two interlocutory arbitration decisions concerning the termination of an employee.
The respondent hospital argued the applications were premature because the arbitration process was not yet complete.
The Divisional Court agreed, finding no exceptional circumstances justified judicial intervention before the arbitrator had issued a final decision on the merits.
The applications for judicial review were dismissed as premature.
Procedural directions issued for a virtual judicial review hearing including electronic document filing protocols.
The court held a case management conference by teleconference to schedule and set procedural directions for two applications for judicial review.
The hearing was scheduled to proceed by video conference using ZOOM technology.
The court issued detailed directions regarding the filing of electronic materials, factums, compendiums, and costs outlines via a password-protected drop box.
