Ontario Civil

Civil Procedure

To permit filing of affidavits would have effect of allowing defendants to split case

Plaintiff was granted interim injunction restraining defendants from diverting business from plaintiff or soliciting plaintiff’s clients. Interim injunction was ordered to remain in effect pending cross-examinations on affidavits by both parties and return of hearing of motion for interlocutory injunction. Defendants brought motion for leave to deliver and file three additional affidavits after completion of cross-examinations. Motion was dismissed. Evidence in affidavits did not meet requirement of relevancy because they did not advance matters at issue specifically with respect to interlocutory injunction motion. Only some of evidence in supplementary affidavits actually responded to matters raised on cross-examinations and that evidence was irrelevant to issue of whether interlocutory injunction should issue or be continued. Plaintiff would suffer non-compensable prejudice if further affidavit evidence was admitted. To permit filing of affidavits would have effect of allowing defendants to split case. Defendants failed to provide reasonable explanation as to why new affidavit evidence could not have been delivered prior to cross-examinations.

Sure Track Courier Ltd. v. Kaisersingh

(Dec. 14, 2011, Ont. S.C.J., Goodman J., File No. CV-11-2817-SR) 211 A.C.W.S. (3d) 782 (15 pp.).

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is the highest number of lawyer candidates in the upcoming Law Society of Ontario Bencher election since 1995, but turn-out is declining. Do you think voting should be mandatory for all lawyers and paralegals in this election?