In the case of Merkur v Devidal dated June 8, 2023, the plaintiffs, Miriam Merkur and Amalgo Corporation Inc., brought a motion seeking leave to deliver an affidavit after cross-examinations for use by the defendants, Jean-Pierre Devidal and Frédéric Menguy, in their jurisdiction motion. The plaintiffs' claim involved damages for negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation related to the purchase of a medical device manufacturer, amounting to $16,000,000. Both the defendants and plaintiff Merkur had been cross-examined, and they had submitted supplementary materials, including transcripts and factums. However, the plaintiffs sought to introduce a new affidavit from Nicolas Flachet, a French lawyer, explaining the French procedural and evidentiary system. The court ruled that the plaintiff's motion was dismissed. It further ordered the plaintiffs to deliver a revised factum that removed references to the Flachet Affidavit. The defendants were allowed to submit their reply to the factum. The parties could agree on a timetable, but if they could not, they were permitted to request a case conference through the Assistant Trial Coordinator. Regarding costs, both parties filed cost outlines and made submissions. The defendants sought partial indemnity costs of $10,441.86 if successful, while the plaintiffs agreed to partial indemnity costs but suggested a sum of $7,500. After considering the factors in Rule 57 and the circumstances of the case, the court awarded partial indemnity costs amounting to $9,000, which were deemed fair, reasonable, and within the parties' reasonable expectations.