The appellant's ex parte motion sought an extension for serving the statement of claim.
The motion judge set aside this order, stating that Hogg did not provide full and fair disclosure in the ex parte hearing.
Appellant's Cross-motion:
The motion judge denied the appellant's cross-motion to retroactively extend the time for service due to the prejudice caused to Wealthsimple by Hogg’s delay.
Appeal Decision:
Awareness of Investigation: The court rejected Hogg's claim that the motion judge erred in concluding he knew about the Mutual Fund Dealers Association (MFDA) investigation into Wealthsimple. The motion judge's inference was upheld.
Balancing Prejudice: The court upheld the motion judge's finding that Wealthsimple was prejudiced by entering into a settlement with the MFDA, which impacted its defense.
Appeal Outcome: The appeal was dismissed, and the respondents were awarded $10,000 in costs.
