SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

COMMERCIAL LIST

CV-13-10138-00CL

RE: CGI Information Systems and Management Consultants Inc., Applicant

AND:

eHealth Ontario, Respondent

CV-13-10150-00CL

RE: eHealth Ontario, Applicant

AND:

CGI Information Systems and Management Consultants Inc., Respondent

BEFORE: D. M. Brown J.

COUNSEL:
F. Paul Morrison and Christopher Hubbard, for CGI Information Systems and Management Consultants Inc.

J. Richler, Robin Linley and Kristin Ali, for eHealth Ontario

HEARD: March 6, 2014

case conference memorandum no. 2

[1] Pleadings were exchanged in accordance with the Litigation Plan. At my request eHealth will file a pleadings brief to my attention through the Commercial List Office by March 14, 2014.

[2] According to the Litigation Plan, the first round of documentary production involved the parties delivering all documents on which they intend to rely at trial in an agreed-upon searchable electronic format. That has resulted in eHealth producing about 1,500 documents and CGI producing about 9,000 documents.

[3] The Litigation Plan then contemplated that both parties would deliver lists of any additional relevant documents that they want the other party to produce (“Production Requests”). That was done on March 3. CGI requested production of 30 categories of documents; eHealth requested production of 46 categories.

[4] The parties intend to exchange, by Tuesday, March 11, annotated Production Requests which identify disputed or questioned items. Counsel will then meet and confer to discuss areas of disagreement.

[5] A further case conference will be held on Thursday, March 20, 2014 at 4 p.m. to review outstanding production differences.

[6] Counsel were given a copy of the Standard Case Management Directions and a brief, very preliminary discussion took place about the form of the trial set for October, 2014.

[7] When I asked about the number of disputed issues in this proceeding, counsel suggested that it would be more helpful to look at the issues in terms of a chronology which started in the summer of 2010 and which ran until the cancellation of the project in September, 2012. Several key events occurred along the way. What occurred at later key events is materially inter-related with what happened at previous key events, and the nature of the relationship is quite technical. I think at a later date, perhaps in advance of the examinations for discovery, it would be useful to identify, in a preliminary but formal way, the key events and the material inter-relationships between those events upon which the trial most likely will focus.

D. M. Brown J.

Date: March 6, 2014