Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Taylor v. Canada

T-345-88

Giles A.S.P.

18/5/94

3 pp.

Defendant moved for order dismissing claim for want of prosecution -- Action commenced by three plaintiffs all represented by same solicitors -- Plaintiff's solicitors obtained order removing them as solicitors for one of plaintiff's on grounds solicitors could not obtain instructions from that plaintiff -- One of plaintiff has not been served and has no notice of motion-Insufficient delay to support dismissal for want of prosecution -- All plaintiffs must act together and appear by one solicitor and one set of counsel -- Proper course when one plaintiff no longer wishing to proceed would be to strike plaintiff and add as defendant -- Herein, adding plaintiff as defendant would not enable action to proceed expeditiously -- Federal Court Rule 1716(2)(a) indicating solution -- Because one of plaintiffs not represented by same solicitors, ceased to be proper party to action -- Order creation of new file, case and trial date for that plaintiff -- Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, R. 1716(2)(a).

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.