The plaintiff brought a motion to strike the jury notice in her motor vehicle collision action, seeking to proceed to trial before a judge alone due to concerns about potential delays and prejudice (financial and mental health) related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The court granted leave for the plaintiff to bring the motion but ultimately dismissed it.
The court found that the plaintiff's grounds, such as temporary jury selection bans, were no longer valid as COVID-19 restrictions had been lifted.
The court emphasized the substantive right to a jury trial and determined that the plaintiff's evidence regarding prejudice was insufficient or lacked concrete detail to justify overriding this right.
The court reserved costs to the trial judge and granted both parties leave to bring further motions if the pandemic circumstances change again.
