What are the implications of Rule 66(29.1) and Rule 37?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Rudman v. Hollander, 2005 BCSC 1805 (CanLII):

Plaintiff's counsel did not address or distinguish the decision of Macaulay, J. in Duong v. Howrath, 2005 BCSC 128, which considered the effect of Rule 66(29.1) and Rule 37 in circumstances very similar to the present case. I agree with and am bound by that decision.

Other Questions


What are the implications of the duty to warn of Trustees of a Trustee? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the implications of the BCSC guidelines on standard of care? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the policy implications of allowing the police to conduct warrantless surveillance? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the implications of COVID-19? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the implications of the Attorney General’s position on constitutional pronouncements? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the principles set out in Houghton v.Houghton and what are the implications of the principles in the case law? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the implications of an arbitrator's decision in a case where a plaintiff was awarded an award for discrimination against her employer based on her disability? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the implications of having a long-term, long term marriage? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the implications of a court finding that all of the unresolved terms can be implied by law? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is solicitor-client privilege waived by implication when a solicitor "enters the fray" by providing affidavit evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.