Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

PRACTICE

Case Management

Microfibres, Inc. v. Annabel Canada Inc.

T-2680-97

2001 FCT 1032, Pelletier J.

20/9/01

9 pp.

Motion to sever issues of liability from issues of quantum of damages in copyright infringement action--Present motion following Prothonotary's order certain documents be produced unless motion under Federal Court Rules, r. 107 presented within limited time, and effectively stayed his order that documents be produced pending disposition of motion--Order granting leave made in knowledge of prior dismissal of motions seeking same relief--Res judicata not applicable herein as Prothonotary acting in capacity of case manager--Given mandate of case manager to give such directions as may lead to most just and expeditious and least expensive resolution of dispute between parties, one can conclude that in those circumstances, case manager acting outside adversarial system--Entitled to act on own motion--R. 385 gave him authority to grant leave to bring motion which would otherwise be caught by doctrine of res judicata and, in so doing, to set aside application of res judicata as would apply to that motion--However, power of case manager to revisit question which has already been decided once not to be exercised capriciously--Test whether there exist facts from which case manager could conclude that process of bringing case to fair trial could be assisted by revisiting particular question--Case manager's views on question entitled to considerable deference--Motion for order under r. 107 not barred by failure of previous motion seeking same relief--Applicant seeking severance of issues of quantum and liability on basis grounds for believing claims of Annabel N.V. will fail--Ultimately, issue one of making best use of time allocated for trial of matter--Order confirming applicants' motion not subject to application of res judicata and remitting motion to Prothonotary for decision on merits of motion--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 107, 385.

 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.