Chang Xin Construction v. 2049390 Ontario Inc., 2025 ONSC 1283
- Issue: The defendant, 2049390 Ontario Inc., sought to adjourn the peremptory trial, citing the health issues of its principal, James Kan.
- Decision: The motion to adjourn was denied.
- Key Reasons:
- The court found no sufficient medical evidence proving Kan was unable to participate.
- His medical reports lacked independent assessments verifying his claimed symptoms.
- The request was made on the eve of trial despite symptoms allegedly existing for over a month.
- Delaying the trial further could impact witness memory and procedural fairness, particularly in a Construction Act lien action, which requires expedited resolution.
Chang Xin Construction v. 2049390 Ontario Inc., 2025 ONSC 1503
- Issue: The plaintiff objected to the defendant’s proposed expert, Michael Colalillo, arguing he was not qualified under Rule 53.03.
- Decision:
- Colalillo was not permitted to testify as a Rule 53.03 expert but could testify as a participant expert, subject to a voir dire.
- His December 30, 2024, and February 10, 2025, reports were ruled inadmissible.
- Key Reasons:
- The reports failed to meet Rules of Civil Procedure requirements.
- He was directly involved in the project, impacting impartiality.
Outcome:
- The trial proceeded as scheduled without adjournment.
- The defendant faced expert evidence restrictions.
- No damages or awards were determined in these rulings.