Ontario Civil


Good reason to doubt correctness of decision to order mistrial

Parties had invested 13 days in trial when judge ruled respondent’s expert witness could not give evidence, so respondent indicated it would need to call many additional witnesses instead, and need more trial time. Additional trial time not available for nine months and judge ruled having trial heard in instalments of that nature could result in miscarriage of justice, so ordered mistrial. Motion by applicants for extension of time to seek leave to appeal and for leave to appeal mistrial decision. Motion granted. Applicants missed seven-day time period to seek leave to appeal by mere days and provided good reason, and there was no prejudice to respondent, so appropriate to extend time. There was good reason to doubt correctness of decision to order mistrial on basis of extended length of trial alone, when no other irregularities were identified. Issue of granting mistrial due to trial length was matter of great importance to all litigants and development of law.

Rosati v. Reggimenti (Sep. 23, 2014, Ont. S.C.J., G.A. Campbell J., File No. D/966/96) 245 A.C.W.S. (3d) 260.

Law Times Poll

A group of benchers opposed to the Statement of Principles will need to win the support of their colleagues to repeal the requirement. Do you think they will be successful in repealing the statement of principles in the coming year?