Even so, looking at the tests for permitting a late jury notice, whether inadvertence, non unconscionable, no real prejudice as characterized in Barkley v. Link [2003], O.J. No. 966 or by assessing “the nature of the reason for delay (including the length of delay and the reasons for it); and whether granting leave would result in prejudice to the other side” as set forth in Nikore v. Proper [2010], O.J. No. 1941, I would find that the reason for delay being a reasonable belief that jury notice had been delivered on time, coupled with the complete failure of the defendants to avert to or complain, that the history favours the plaintiff.
"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.