Lyons Estate v. Dr. Freeman et al., 2017 ONSC 676 (CanLII)
Justice Corthorn dismissed the defendant doctor’s motion for leave to bring a motion for summary judgment at the beginning of the second week of trial.
Released January 27, 2017 | Full Decision [CanLII]
The defendant physician moved for leave to bring a motion for summary judgment at the beginning of the second week of trial.
Justice Corthorn cited a decision of Justice Quinn in Fruitland v. Juices Inc. v. Custom Farm Service Inc.for the proposition that the timing of a motion for summary judgment is not relevant “[s]o long as the motion, if successful, will be less costly and time-consuming than the trial, and will not unduly delay the start of the trial.”
The moving party must adduce evidence of cost-effectiveness, including a comparison of costs of trial versus those of summary judgment. On the motion before her, the defendant physician put forward no evidence to support a finding that summary judgment, after more than a week of trial would be “proportionate, more expeditious, and less expensive” than if the trial were to be completed. The defendant physician submitted that the cost-effectiveness of summary judgment was “obvious”; Justice Corthorn dismissed this suggestion out of hand.
She dismissed the motion and found that it had “no chance of success”. Consequently, she ordered the defendant physician to pay costs in any event of the cause, with the scale to be determined at a later date.
Read the full decision on CanLII