What is the general approach to a status hearing?

With respect to the general approach to be taken on a status hearing, I adopt the comments of Myers J. in Orsi v. Fromstein[2] at para. 20 where he states: I do not see it as desirable to turn status hearings into collateral inquisitions on every imaginable procedural decision made in the case. Similarly, I do not see status hearings involving a set of many discoveries. That just causes more cost and delay. The substance of the defendant’s argument regarding pre-litigation delay is a limitation period defence. This defence is extensively and cogently pleaded in the statement of defence. Just prior to the defendant’s counsel advising that they would be contesting this motion below, they also advised the plaintiffs’ counsel that they would be bringing a motion for summary judgment on the limitation period. They should feel free to do so. But status hearings should not be opposed because of concerns with the particularity of pleadings, to try to test limitation defences, or to bog down a case in procedures covered elsewhere in the Rules and the law. Cases with real delay causing real prejudice will be dismissed much more readily now than in past. But the Rules of Civil Procedure remain focused on providing the most efficient means to resolve disputes on the merits. Delay