MENTZELOPOULOS v ALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES, 2026 ABKB 502

In this Case Management Endorsement, the Court considered whether the Plaintiff’s Application for further and better records should be heard before the Defendants’ narrowly focused Summary Dismissal Application.

Justice Lema agreed with Plaintiff’s counsel that, even if the Summary Dismissal Application resulted in the determination of certain issues, other issues would remain outstanding. The Court therefore found that proceeding with the Summary Dismissal Application first would not be an efficient use of resources.

Lema J. considered the Court of Appeal decision in P. Burns Resources Limited v Honourable Patrick Burns Memorial Trust, 2015 ABCA 390 (“P. Burns Resources”), in relation to the Application for further and better records. In P. Burns Resources, the Court of Appeal held that Rule 5.3 confers a discretionary power to modify or waive any right or obligation under Part 5 of the Rules, and that there is no mandatory suspension of Part 5 document production or questioning merely because an application for summary judgment has been brought. Applying P. Burns Resources, Justice Lema held that much of the documentary evidence relevant to the substantive issues was in the Defendants’ possession.

The Court concluded that the Defendants’ narrow-focused Summary Dismissal Application would not be appropriate. The next step would therefore be the Plaintiff’s Application for further and better records, unless the Defendants provided further disclosure that the Plaintiff accepted as adequate.