Joshi v. Vien

Joshi v. Vien

The defendants failed to establish the requisite intention to elect a jury during the 21-day period after delivery of the notice of trial and relied on affidavit evidence that did not distinguish personal knowledge from information and belief; the ICBC report and labelled binder photo were insufficient to prove...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2003 BCSC 1772
Parties
Plaintiffs: Raman Joshi and Parveen Sudhir; Defendants: Thi T. Vien and Ha Nhat Diem Nguyen
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury (motor Vehicle) / Application to Extend Time to File Jury Notice (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Jury Notice, Rules of Court, Affidavit Evidence, Intention to Elect Jury
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Evidence Extension of Time Jury Notice Rules of Court Affidavit Evidence Intention to Elect Jury

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raman Joshi and Parveen Sudhir

Plaintiffs

Thi T. Vien and Ha Nhat Diem Nguyen

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Personal Injury (motor Vehicle) / Application to Extend Time to File Jury Notice (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should extend time to file and deliver a jury notice under Rule 39(26) and Rule 3(2)
  2. 2 Whether the defendants had a clear intention to elect a jury trial during the 21-day period following delivery of the notice of trial
  3. 3 Whether the affidavit evidence established personal knowledge as opposed to inadmissible hearsay

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants failed to establish the requisite intention to elect a jury during the 21-day period after delivery of the notice of trial and relied on affidavit evidence that did not distinguish personal knowledge from information and belief; the ICBC report and labelled binder photo were insufficient to prove intent in the relevant period, therefore leave to file the jury notice out of time is denied.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Costs in the cause to the plaintiffs