What is the test for extending the deadline to set an action down for trial?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from Erland v. Ontario, 2019 ONCA 689 (CanLII):
It is common ground that the motion judge correctly identified the applicable law. Subrules 48.14(5)-(7) provide that where the plaintiff seeks to extend the deadline to set an action down for trial, the plaintiff/moving party must show cause why the action should not be dismissed for delay. In order to meet this burden the plaintiff must prove that (1) there is an acceptable explanation for the delay and (2) that allowing the action to proceed would not cause the defendant(s) to suffer non-compensable prejudice: Kara v. Arnold, 2014 ONCA 871, 328 O.A.C. 382, at para. 8. This test is conjunctive.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the test for a motion to extend the deadline to set an action down for trial? (Ontario, Canada)
What are the implications of a motion judge's decisions regarding the restoration of an action to the trial list under r.48.11 and the dismissal of an Action for Delay pursuant to r.24.01? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for ordering a new trial after a civil jury trial? (Ontario, Canada)
What factors are considered in determining the appropriate forum for the trial of the action? (Ontario, Canada)
If the parties cannot agree on costs in a personal injury action, what are the deadlines for responding to the claim? (Ontario, Canada)
How has the trial judge considered the totality of evidence at trial for impaired driving? (Ontario, Canada)
Can a plaintiff's action be dismissed if they fail to attend the trial? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there a risk to the trial of this report if this report is excluded from the trial? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for the right to a jury trial in a civil action? (Ontario, Canada)
Is the order of a trial judge dispensing with a jury during the course of the trial consistently treated as an exercise of the exercise of his discretion? (Ontario, Canada)
