RK v GSG

This decision addressed whether several Defendants were barred from advancing Summary Dismissal applications on account of their failure to comply with deadlines set out in a Case Management Order.

The Case Management Order required any new Summary Dismissal applications to be filed and served by a specified deadline. Although the signed Order referred to filing and service “prior to February 27, 2026,” Justice Mah reviewed the court recording and confirmed that he had actually directed compliance “by February 27, 2026.” One Defendant fully complied, while two others filed their Applications on time but served materials late and did not provide properly sworn and filed Affidavits until several weeks after the deadline.

Justice Mah considered the purposes of case management under Rule 4.13, including promoting the fair, efficient, and orderly progress of litigation. The Court emphasized that case management is intended to facilitate proportionate and efficient resolution of disputes and noted the Court of Appeal’s encouragement of appropriate summary determination processes. While the Defendants had not complied strictly with the deadlines and demonstrated a lack of diligence, some steps toward compliance had been taken and the delays did not justify preventing potentially case-narrowing summary dismissal Applications from proceeding.

Mah J. permitted all summary dismissal Applications to continue. Justice Mah held that any prejudice arising from the missed deadlines could be addressed through costs rather than by barring the Applications. The Court also exercised its authority under Rule 9.12 to correct the earlier Case Management Order so that the deadline read “by February 27, 2026,” reflecting the Order actually pronounced.