Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CV-11-2883
DATE: 20140123

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: Danial Korkis, Plaintiff

AND:

John F. Mora, Lorena J. Mora, Juana de Los Regalado, Romeel Dariawesh, Defendants

BEFORE: Price, J.

COUNSEL:
Frank A. Calcagni, for the Plaintiff

Chris T. Blom, for the Defendants

HEARD: January 23, 2014

ENDORSEMENT

[1] The defendant, Romeel Dariawesh, moves for an order transferring four actions from Toronto to Brampton, namely Court File Numbers CV-11-425344, CV-11-430935, CV-11-430950, and CV-11-429671, to be tried with two actions commenced in Brampton, namely Court File Numbers CV-11-2883 and CV-11-2884, or one following the other; on the ground that the Toronto actions and the Brampton actions, all of which appear to have arisen from a motor vehicle accident on July 18, 2009, at Eglinton Avenue West and Dixie Road in the City of Toronto, have issues of law and/or fact in common.

[2] The motion is brought pursuant to Rule 13.1.02, among others. Rule 13.1.02(2)(b) provides that the court may make an order to transfer a proceeding to a court other than the one in which it was commenced if the court is satisfied that a transfer is desirable in the interests of justice, having regard to, among other factors:

(i). Where a substantial part of the events or omissions that gave rise to the claim occurred;

(ii). Where a substantial part of the damages were sustained;

(iii). Where the subject matter of the proceeding is or was located;

(iv). Any local community’s interests in the subject matter of the proceeding.

[3] All of the above considerations appear to favour a trial of the actions in Toronto, since the collision appears to have occurred there.

[4] Rule 13.1.02(2)(b) further directs the court to consider the following factor:

(v). The convenience of the parties, the witnesses and the court.

[5] There is no evidence offered in the supporting material that would enable the Court to assess the impact that a trial in Toronto or in Brampton is likely to have on the convenience of the parties or the witnesses.

[6] Rule 13.1.02(2)(b) further directs the court to consider:

(vi). Any advantages or disadvantages of a particular place with respect to securing the just, most expeditious, and least expensive determination of the proceeding on its merits;

(vii). Whether judges and court facilities are available at the other county.

[7] Before a case can be transferred from one region to another, the Regional Senior Justice in each region must be consulted with a view to ensuring there are adequate resources in the receiving jurisdiction. In Central West Region, which includes Brampton, all the information must be requested from the regional manager, who is currently Sandra Sanderson. There is no evidence before the Court that this protocol has been followed, and no evidence from either region as to whether judges and court facilities are available.

[8] For the foregoing reasons, the motion is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the parties to move for transfer of the Brampton actions to Toronto.

Price, J.

Date: January 23, 2014