MT>3
  • Home
  • About
  • People
  • Services
    • e-Discovery
    • Managed Review
    • Information Governance
    • Due Diligence
  • Blog
  • News
  • Contact

Court Rejects “Old Brain Thinking” in Key Proportionality Analysis

20/1/2015

 
The Test is no Longer “Perfect Discovery”

In a ringing endorsement for the proportionality principle and a wake-up call to counsel, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice denied an adjournment request made by the defendant following delivery of additional records by the plaintiff a month before trial.  In doing so, in Letang v. Hertz Canada 2015 ONSC 72, Justice Myers held that: “There does not need to be perfect disclosure and perfect discovery on every path and alleyway in order to achieve a fair and just outcome of the case on the merits. The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that the goal of achieving a fair and just civil dispute resolution process becomes illusory unless it is proportionate, timely, and affordable.”

At the suggestion of the pre-trial judge, the plaintiff had produced 465 additional records to back-up his damages claim.  Instead of immediately having its expert review the records and conducting an examination of the plaintiff, the defendant brought a motion to adjourn the trial for 90 days, returnable  a week before the trial was scheduled to start.  The court denied the request.  In doing so, Justice Myer criticized the defendant’s strategy: “The idea that the defendants can ignore a trial date and sit on material for a month without bothering to call their expert and just deliver another fat motion record to buy 90 days of unlimited discovery time for more fishing for documents is old brain thinking.”  The court applied the proportionality principle, found that it requires a balancing and that “in this case, the fair and just result is to get on to trial next week….Procedural gamesmanship, incessant delay, and discovery without end have brought the civil justice system to the brink of a crisis.”

In making these findings, the court noted that 465 records was not a significant amount of documents in the “information age” in which counsel routinely deal with cases involving tens of thousands of records. Dealing with large amounts of client information is now a “core legal skill.”

Finding that the defendant could achieve the same result at trial in terms of testing the credibility of the plaintiff’s claims as it could with the requested “unlimited” discovery, the court held that the delay of the trial would be prejudicial to the plaintiff, which was not proportionate. “Delay at all stages should be recognized as a serious form of prejudice that undermines affordability and proportionality and rots the uncompromisable goals of fairness and justice.”    The court did order that the plaintiff attend that week for no more than two hours of further discovery and the trial proceed as scheduled.

​The idea that there should be “perfect” discovery in every case is outdated.  Ontario’s courts have been clear – the proportionality principle must be applied and a fair and just result will often mean going to trial without perfect disclosure. Letang makes it clear that parties who ignore proportionality in their litigation strategy, do so at their peril.


Comments are closed.

    Categories

    All
    Artificial Intelligence
    Blockchain
    Cyber Security
    E Discovery
    Information Governance
    Legaltech
    Privacy
    Social Media
    Technology


    Archives

    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    November 2020
    October 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    September 2017
    August 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    June 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    December 2008
    March 2008
    November 2007
    October 2007

130 Adelaide Street West Suite 2020
Toronto, Ontario M5H 3P5
​ ​
t: 416-642-2220  
tf: 1-877-642-2220  
f: 416-868-0673
Contact MT>3
@MT>3 2018. All Rights Reserved
Picture

Privacy Policy and Terms of Use

  • Home
  • About
  • People
  • Services
    • e-Discovery
    • Managed Review
    • Information Governance
    • Due Diligence
  • Blog
  • News
  • Contact