S. Taylor

The self-represented plaintiff in a solicitor's negligence action requested a case conference after failing to comply with a court-ordered timetable.

The plaintiff had not provided an Affidavit of Documents by the deadline, arguing he was waiting for additional documents from the defendant.

The plaintiff also failed to attend his scheduled examination for discovery.

The court found the plaintiff in breach of the timetable, directed the parties to bring their respective motions regarding document production and discovery attendance in Masters' Court, and awarded costs of the case conference to the defendant.

At a case conference in a solicitor's negligence action, the court established a timetable for the conduct of the action, including dates for documentary discovery, examinations for discovery, mandatory mediation, and expert reports.

The parties also agreed to stay a related application to enforce a fee arrangement pending an assessment of the defendant's fees.

The plaintiffs purchased lots in an industrial subdivision and sued the municipality for negligent misrepresentation, alleging they relied on a letter from the building director indicating building permits would be available.

The plaintiffs claimed the letter failed to disclose that the Ministry of the Environment required a section 45 approval before permits could issue.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the action, finding that the letter was not misleading and that the plaintiffs failed to read the subdivision agreement, which explicitly stated the requirement for environmental approval.

The court also held that the action was statute-barred as the plaintiffs ought to have discovered the material facts more than six years before commencing the lawsuit.