David Boies is a legendary litigator, having been involved in many of the leading civil cases in the United States. Early in his career, he defended IBM against anti-trust charges and CBS in a hard fought libel case brought by William Westmoreland. When the U.S. government launched a legal case against Microsoft, it turned to
David Boies and the Art of Cross-Examination Read More »
The subject of access to justice has been receiving much attention of late. It was top of mind at the annual conference of the Canadian Bar Association. Consultation reports on the topic are forthcoming. I would like to focus, however, on a subject that has more practical implications for civil cases currently in our Court
Delays in Obtaining Civil Trial Dates: An Issue of Concern Read More »
The decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Zacharias v. Zurich Insurance Company, 2013 ONCA 482, is of interest in a number of respects. From the perspective of appellate practice, the case is noteworthy in that the grounds for the Court’s decision were based on an argument that had not been made before
Case Comment: Zacharias v. Zurich Insurance Company Read More »
There has been so much of value written on the subject of oral advocacy that it would be impossible to review these efforts in a short paper. For the purpose of discussing oral advocacy in motions court, there are several approaches that warrant emphasis: (1) put yourself in the position of the audience; (2) the
Oral Argument in Motions Court Read More »
The Dubin Lecture on Advocacy, named in honour of former Chief Justice of Ontario and legendary litigator Charles Dubin, is a series on advocacy started in 1998. Lectures are delivered every two years and have included luminaries of the legal profession from across the globe. Some of them have been very funny. The first speaker,
Humour at the Dubin Lecture on Advocacy Read More »
Overview In its groundbreaking decision in Morguard Investments Ltd. v. De Savoye, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1077 on the enforcement of interprovincial judgments, the Supreme Court of Canada emphasized the need for “order and fairness” in the assumption of jurisdiction over a defendant resident outside the jurisdiction. The court held that there must be a “real and
Jurisdiction in Tort Actions After The Muscutt Quintet Read More »
When the Rules of Civil Procedure came into effect in 1985, they heralded a new approach to the use of summary judgment. A procedure that had previously been available only to Plaintiffs and only in claims that were specially endorsed was now, under Rule 20, available to either party and the responding party was warned
The Use Of Summary Judgment in Long-Term Disability Claims Read More »
The purposes of an examination for discovery have been well described by Mr. Justice Trainor in Ontario Bean Producers Marketing Board v. W.G. Thompson & Sons (1981), 32 O.R. (2d) 69 (H.C.J.) as: (1) to enable the examining party to know the opponent’s case; (2) to obtain admissions in order to dispense with formal proof or destroy
Controlling Your Witness And Getting Admissions On Examination For Discovery Read More »
It has been said many times that the introduction of the Rules of Civil Procedure in January 1985 was designed to broaden the scope of documentary and oral discovery. An important, and perhaps overlooked, facet of the Rules is the right to obtain the identity of persons who might have knowledge of the matters in issue. Rule
The Use Of Rule 31.06(2) In Medical Malpractice Cases Read More »
Overview The Simplified Procedure provided for in Rule 76 of the Rules of Civil Procedure was introduced into our litigation system in 1996 and expanded in 2002 to encompass claims for up to $50,000.00. The purpose of the Simplified Rules is to reduce the procedure and attendant cost associated with such claims and thereby promote
The Simplified Procedure In Long-Term Disability Claims Read More »
