Court File and Parties
COURT FILE NO.: CV-15-522676 DATE: 20210615 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: SYED ABID HUSSAIN and RUBINA ABID Plaintiffs AND: DAYA SINGH FLORA and BALBIR FLORA Defendants
COURT FILE NO.: CV-15-528162 DATE: 20210615
AND RE: SYED ABID HUSSAIN Plaintiff AND: DAYA SINGH FLORA Defendant
BEFORE: Mr. Justice Chalmers COUNSEL: A. Zweig for the Plaintiffs D. Bourassa for the Defendants HEARD: June 15, 2021 by videoconference
Endorsement
The Plaintiff, Syed Abid Hussain takes the position that he is a 50% owner with the Defendant, Daya Singh Flora of the property located at 869 Broadview Ave. Toronto. The trial was scheduled to begin on February 16, 2021. Before the trial started, the court office adjourned the trial to September 20, 2021.
A pre-trial conference was conducted in the period leading up to the first trial date. A second pre-trial took place before me today. The parties took the position that attempts were previously made to settle the case and that the pre-trial today should focus on trial management issues as opposed to settlement.
I advised counsel that the parties should consider having further discussions with respect to settlement. I noted that the parties were able to come to an agreement with respect to another property. In addition, the value of the Broadview property has increased during the course of the litigation which may provide more opportunities to reach an agreement. Counsel agreed that there may be value in discussing settlement as the trial approaches. I offered to make myself available for a pre-trial conference focused on settlement, if the parties were of the view that there would be any value. If the parties wish to proceed with a pre-trial/settlement conference, they are to advise the court office by August 13, 2021.
Counsel for the Plaintiff identified several issues which must be addressed to ensue the parties are ready to proceed to trial as scheduled on September 20, 2021.
The original Statement of Claim and Statement of Defence were drafted by prior counsel for the parties. The pleadings are lengthy and prolix and in need of better drafting. Both counsel agree that the pleadings should be redrafted to make it easier for the trial judge to understand and deal with the issues at trial. Plaintiff’s counsel prepared a redrafted Claim. Counsel for the Defendants has not yet done so. At the pre-trial today, counsel for the Defendant agreed to provide the redrafted Defence on or before August 20, 2021.
The parties agree to file a joint document brief at the commencement of trial. Plaintiff’s counsel provided a list of documents to be included in the joint document brief. Counsel for the Defendant has not provided his position with the respect to the Plaintiff’s proposed documents and has not provided a list of the Defendant’s documents to be included in the joint document brief. At the pre-trial today, counsel for the Defendant agreed to provide his position with respect to the joint document brief and provide his list of documents by August 20, 2021.
In preparation for trial, the Plaintiff located an additional document that had not been listed in their Affidavit of Documents. The Plaintiff intends to introduce the document as an exhibit at trial. Plaintiff’s counsel asked defence counsel if there is any objection to the document. At the pre-trial today, counsel for the Defendant advised that he has no objection to the document being used at trial.
The Plaintiff takes the position that as a 50% owner of the Broadview property, he is entitled to a share in the profits. The Defendant undertook to produce documents with respect to the income and expenses of the Broadview Property. This undertaking has not been answered. The undertaking was also the subject matter of various orders which have not been compiled with.
At the pre-trial today, counsel for the Defendant agreed to provide the answers to the undertakings by August 6, 2021. I direct the Defendant to immediately start assembling the answers to the undertakings to ensure that complete answers are provided by August 6, 2021. If the documents/answers to undertakings are not provided by that date, counsel for the Plaintiff advised that he intends to argue to the trial judge that the Defendant is required to “show cause” why the defence should not to be struck as a result of the failure to answer the undertakings or comply with the court orders.
Counsel for both parties stated that there should be no further adjournments of the trial. I agree. I remain seized with respect to the production issues and any other issues which may affect the readiness of this matter to proceed to trial on September 20, 2021.
DATE: JUNE 15, 2021