Background Facts:
Harondel J. Sibble filed a putative class action against Google LLC, Google Canada Corporation, and Alphabet Inc. in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. The case involved alleged user data and privacy violations, including trespass, invasion of privacy, breach of the Competition Act, consumer protection violations, and unjust enrichment.

The proposed class included Canadian residents (excluding Quebec) who used Google services or visited third-party websites from November 1, 2008, to the judgment date. Certification had not yet been achieved, and an eight-day hearing was scheduled for June 2, 2025.

The plaintiff served two Notices to Admit (NTAs) under Rule 7-7 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, seeking admissions of facts and authenticity of documents related to legal proceedings involving Google. The defendants denied the requests as improper, ineffective, and irrelevant. The plaintiff applied to strike the responses as scandalous, frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process and sought deemed admissions.

Legal Issues:

• Whether serving NTAs before class certification was proper.

• Whether the defendants’ responses to NTAs were valid under Rule 7-7.

Court’s Analysis and Decision:
The court held that NTAs were proof tools rather than discovery mechanisms and could be served pre-certification. The defendants’ bare denials complied with Rule 7-7(2)(a) and did not require reasons. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s application to strike the responses and found no conflict with the CPA or the Case Plan Order.

Costs/Award:
The court awarded costs to the defendants as costs in the cause.