In brief oral reasons, the motion judge correctly identified the applicable test in Reid v. Dow Corning Corp (2001), 11 CPC (5th) 809 at para. 41, rev’d (2002), 48 CPC (5th) 93. He rejected the hearsay evidence of the appellant’s solicitor as to the reasons for the delay and as to why the motion was not brought promptly. He also found that there was no evidence to establish the absence of prejudice, other than the “bald assertion” of the deponent.
"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.