Shane Murphy

The plaintiff sued the defendants, alleging they disclosed confidential information, including unit credit prices and site fill capacity, to competitors.

The defendants moved for summary judgment.

The court found no evidence to support the plaintiff's allegations of breach of confidence and noted the plaintiff failed to call key witnesses or provide evidence beyond mere supposition.

The action was dismissed.

The plaintiff sought an adjournment of the defendants' scheduled summary judgment motion to allow it to move on refusals from a Rule 39.03 examination of a non-party competitor.

The court denied the adjournment, finding that the plaintiff had failed to disclose its intention to conduct the examination when scheduling the motion, and that the examination itself was a disproportionate fishing expedition unsupported by evidence.

Applying the culture shift mandated by Hryniak, the court held that the defendants were entitled to have their motion heard without further delay.

In a certified class action alleging price maintenance and conspiracy by a franchisor and its designated food supplier, the parties brought reciprocal motions regarding refusals on examinations for discovery.

The court applied the principles of relevance, materiality, and proportionality, emphasizing that the action was certified based on a 'top-down' systemic approach rather than a 'bottom-up' product-by-product analysis.

The court largely upheld the refusals, finding many questions to be irrelevant, disproportionate, or inconsistent with the certified common issues, while ordering a small number of questions to be answered.