The New Standard for Practising in the New Regime
The Osborne amendments to the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure have been in place since January, and the courts have already ruled on its implications. The new edition of Ontario Superior Court Practice incorporates the latest case law into its commentary, to help you understand how the changes will be interpreted and applied.
Features
- "Practice Notes" throughout highlight the governing principles for interpreting and applying the legislation and rules, with footnote references to the leading and useful example decisions (see sample annotation below)
- Causes of action and damages table – comprehensive listing of over 50 of the most common civil claims and heads of damages, detailing the necessary elements that must be pleaded – referenced by the leading case law
- Substantive limitation periods table – setting out the Ontario and federal statutory limitation periods. Plus, a highlight of relevant procedural timelines under each rule as well as in table format and an overview of the common law of limitation periods
- Solicitors Act annotated – full coverage of this important statute, with the rules governing the assessment and collection of accounts as reflected in the leading cases
- Appendices – providing quick reference to over 25 pertinent court practice guidelines
- Forms book and forms CD-ROM – providing quick access to forms most commonly resorted to
Sample Annotation – Rule 29.2.01
PRACTICE NOTES
§1 General principles Rule 29.2 does not have the effect of allowing the court to shift the costs of production. Rather, the rule operates to relieve a party from an obligation to produce documents based on the notion of proportionality, which compels the court to consider whether the time involved is unreasonable, whether the expense is unjustified, whether there would be undue prejudice, whether there would be undue interference with the conduct of the action and whether the documents are readily available from another source. In order to avoid the production, it is incumbent upon the moving party to adduce evidence as to these considerations.1
Counsel should also have regard to the recently released public comment version of the Sedona Canada Guidelines on e-discovery as well as their American counterpart. The Sedona Canada Guidelines are intended to reflect a broad consensus about electronic data preservation and production. Inherent in the Sedona Canada Guidelines are principles of good faith, collaboration, proportionality, focus and demonstrable relevance.2
It appears to be accepted in Canadian practice that the obligation of discovery is tempered by the application of proportionality or cost/benefit ratio. In Alberta, this means that records must only be disclosed if they are not only relevant, but also material. Although a principle of general proportionality is articulated in the Alberta Rules of Court, there is also an implicit requirement that limits production to those records which are reasonably accessible. However, in the case of a very large monetary claim which included punitive damages and where all the parties were extremely IT competent, proportionality was not a major consideration in the discovery process.3
Special Offer
Purchase Morden & Perell – The Law of Civil Procedure in Ontario and Ontario Superior Court Practice, 2011 Edition together and save 40% off the cost of Ontario Superior Court Practice. To order these titles at the special combo price of $324 + tax please contact Customer Service at 1-800-668-6481 or customerservice@lexisnexis.ca.
Butterworths
Ontario Reports
