In the case of Chohan v. Chohan, dated February 15, 2023, an application was made by the defendants, Sukhdev Chohan and Hardeep Chohan, to compel the production of documents from the plaintiffs, Kulwant Chohan and Kulbir Chohan. The case revolved around a dispute over the ownership of a nursery business in Surrey, British Columbia. The plaintiffs had alleged that they solely covered the purchase price of the nursery, yet all three brothers remained registered owners, while the defendants had sold other properties without sharing the proceeds. The defendants denied the existence of a pooling agreement and argued for mutual benefits in their family business. The plaintiffs opposed the application, citing timing issues, lack of compliance with rules, and insufficient relevance. Ultimately, the court dismissed the application, stating that it had been made too late and lacked a connection to the pleadings. The court awarded costs to the plaintiffs. No information on the amount of costs was specified in the case.