Background:
In Macropus Global Ltd. v. Sumit Ghai, the British Columbia Supreme Court addressed a construction payment dispute between Macropus Global Ltd. ("Macropus") and Sumit Ghai. The dispute arose from an agreement on January 6, 2022, in which Macropus was contracted to build a new home for Ghai at 3960 Sherwood Road, Saanich, B.C. Macropus claimed Ghai failed to pay $66,315.25 for completed work, including the initial amount of $31,523.50 and additional costs incurred in opposing Ghai’s attempts to remove liens from the property.

Legal Issues:
Ghai sought to withdraw deemed admissions resulting from his failure to respond to a Notice to Admit when he was temporarily self-represented. He argued he misunderstood the obligation to respond due to language barriers and believed the Notice was improperly served by email without a court stamp. Macropus argued Ghai, experienced in legal matters with past civil cases, should have known to respond promptly. Macropus further alleged Ghai engaged in witness tampering and other misconduct, which Ghai denied.

Court’s Analysis:
Applying criteria from Sidhu v. Hothi (2014), the court considered whether Ghai’s admissions were made inadvertently and the potential prejudice to either party if withdrawn. The judge emphasized that serious allegations, such as criminal accusations, warranted determination on their merits rather than by deemed admission.

Outcome:
The court permitted Ghai to withdraw the admissions, allowing for a full trial on the facts. Costs of this application were awarded in Ghai's favor, with final amounts to be resolved at the case's conclusion.