PRACTICE |
Case Management |
Sawridge Band v. Canada
T-66-86A
2002 FCT 254, Hugessen J.
4/3/02
7 pp.
Motions seeking variance in case management orders limiting time for examination for discovery by parties and prescribing discoveries be completed by May 1, 2002-- Present motion seeking to extend that deadline and make further modifications in number of other time lines consequential on May 1 date--Grounds: volume of documents and complexity of litigation, coupled with fact Crown has only recently taken on additional lawyers and researchers to deal with case, now show impossibility of preparing for and conducting examinations for discovery within time allotted--Plaintiffs' cross-motions late filed, without even attempt to seek leave of Court or consent of affected parties--Improperly supported by affidavit of one of plaintiffs' counsel--Affidavit cannot be accepted as evidence of facts asserted and without such evidence, cross-motion fails--Motions dismissed--Plaintiffs have shown no real interest in advancing case to trial as already acting as though impugned legislation found to be invalid--Equally, Crown has shown itself unwilling or unable to devote necessary resources to case and to force plaintiffs to comply with various scheduling orders--Parties simply incapable or cannot be trusted to conduct litigation themselves, even when case managed--Although interveners may suffer serious prejudice by delay, they also ask for adjustments to schedule to allow Crown to adequately prepare--But Court has no confidence any scheduling order will be followed or that parties themselves will do what is necessary to enforce order--Court going to have to supervise and monitor discovery process far more closely than normally would or should, and going to have to restrict parties' rights of discovery in unfortunate but necessary way--Parties brought this upon themselves--Both parties guilty of misconduct and cannot, by that misconduct, obtain variation of order made by Court--Therefore, within three weeks following May 1, 2002, each party to prepare and submit proposed written interrogatories to Court and to other parties--Court will personally supervise interrogatories and will give leave for and order to be answered only such of them as deemed proper--Interveners' interrogatories will also be discussed but interveners will not have right to conduct oral discoveries.