PIIKANI NATION v RAYMOND JAMES LTD, 2026 ABKB 625

In long-standing case-managed litigation involving Piikani, the Court addressed four interlocutory Applications relating to pre-trial discovery, records production, and requests for particulars in two related Actions (the “0601 Action” and the “0801 Action”). The Plaintiff, Piikani Nation, and Third Parties, CIBC Trust Corporation and CIBC World Markets Inc. (the "CIBC Parties"), applied in the 0601 Action to compel the Defendant, Liliana Kostic ("Kostic"), to respond to Undertakings and attend further Questioning. Kostic applied for extensive additional disclosure in both Actions, as well as further particulars and responses to written questions in the 0601 Action.

Piikani Nation’s Application, and Kostic’s Applications, were each granted in part with specific directions for discovery completion. The Application by the CIBC Parties was also granted.

Justice Marion emphasized the distinction between particulars pursuant to Rule 3.61 and pre-trial discovery. The Court held that particulars are a matter of pleadings, rather than discovery or evidence, and serve to inform parties of the case to meet and narrow issues, whereas discovery functions to obtain evidence. Pursuant to Rule 13.7, particulars of misrepresentation must be pleaded.

Marion J. held that the particulars of Piikani Nation’s misrepresentation claim provided sufficient material facts and confirmed that the claim was for negligent misrepresentation or misrepresentation by silence. However, the Court relied on Rule 3.61 and directed Piikani Nation to file misrepresentation particulars setting out pleaded facts rather than incorporating discovery evidence. The Court dismissed Kostic’s demands for further particulars for damages, negligence, and realized gains, holding that particulars were not meant to obtain or recite evidence and that relevant factual inquiries and expert opinions were properly addressed through discovery, the expert process, or trial.

The Court reaffirmed that Part 5 of the Rules establishes a self-discovery system imposing positive and ongoing obligations on the parties to disclose relevant and material records, subject to relevance, materiality, and proportionality. Addressing Kostic’s Application for additional disclosure, the Court dismissed the request, holding that a party takes an adversary’s production as complete unless it establishes otherwise or that further disclosure cannot be compelled.

On the non-party CIBC Trust in the 0801 Action, Justice Marion applied Rule 5.13. The Court found that records pertaining to CIBC Trust’s involvement in the SWIFT Scheme allegations were relevant and material to issues raised in that Action. Because those records could not be obtained from Piikani Nation, the Court ordered non-party production, subject to privilege or other valid objections, and payment of CIBC Trust’s incremental out-of-pocket production costs by Kostic.

Regarding Questioning and Undertakings, Marion J. granted the CIBC Parties’ Application to question Kostic for an extra day. The Court found that this was a reasonable and proportionate particularly as Kostic acted unreasonably by refusing to complete her previously scheduled Questioning.

In evaluating Piikani Nation’s Application, the Court directed Kostic to provide proper answers to several outstanding Undertakings pursuant to Rule 5.30. Regarding Kostic’s written questions pursuant to Rule 5.28, the Court noted that written questions must be succinct, as per Rule 5.28(1), and remain subject to requirements governing proper Questioning, pursuant to Rule 5.25. While rejecting most of Kostic’s questions as improper, non-succinct or overly broad, the Court applied Rule 1.2 to give effect to factual inquiries for relevant and material information.

Lastly, Marion J. held that Piikani Nation's representative had a duty to make inquiries of CIBC Trust regarding matters over which Piikani Nation, as beneficiary of the Trust, had the right to request and compel information. The Court rejected Piikani Nation’s position that those inquiries should simply be directed to the trustee.