The self-represented Appellant appealed a prior Order which addressed numerous outstanding procedural issues. This Order arose from a Rule 4.10 case management conference that the Appellant failed to attend.

The Court of Appeal recognized that procedural decisions by a Case Management Judge are typically subject to significant deference. After the Court of Appeal identified the purposes of case management, as enumerated in Rule 4.13, the Court of Appeal recognized that neither a case management conference pursuant to Rule 4.10, nor case management under Rule 4.13, relieves the parties the responsibilities of managing the litigation under Rule 4.1. Ultimately, considering the Appellant’s conduct, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the Order was reasonable and dismissed the Appeal.