Dealing first with the application for answers to interrogatories, in my view, it should be dismissed. The “interrogatories” are not in proper form. They are phrased as “assignments or orders” rather than questions: Tse-Ching v. Wesbild Holdings Ltd. (1994), 98 B.C.L.R. (2d) 92 (S.C.). In addition, they were served prior to the expiration of the time for delivery of the statement of defence, contrary to Rule 29(3). I note that the utility of proceeding by way of interrogatories, at this point, with the defendant’s examination for discovery imminent, is doubtful.
"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.