LaPrairie Crane (Alberta) Ltd. v. Triton Projects Inc.

LaPrairie Crane (Alberta) Ltd. v. Triton Projects Inc.

Triton failed to demonstrate sufficient relevance and evidentiary basis under Rule 7-1(11) for broader document disclosure; the court lacks power to compel written answers to discovery questions; there was no justification to order affidavits verifying document lists; accordingly the application for additional disclosure and compelled answers is dismissed except for items agreed by consent.

Citation
2012 BCSC 1594
Parties
Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim: LaPrairie Crane (Alberta) Ltd.; Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim: LaPrairie Crane Ltd.; Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Triton Projects Inc.; Defendant by Counterclaim: Scott LaPrairie carrying on business as LaPrairie Crane
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Construction Contract Dispute — Discovery Application / Interlocutory Application for Further Disclosure and Compelled Answers at Examination for Discovery Before Master Bouck
Outcome
Application dismissed except for terms consented to in advance of or at the hearing
Legal Topics
Document Production, Examination for Discovery, Relevance of Documents, Mitigation, Affidavit Verifying Documents, Measure of Damages
Source Language
English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Discovery Construction Law Damages Document Production Examination for Discovery Relevance of Documents +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LaPrairie Crane (Alberta) Ltd.

Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim

LaPrairie Crane Ltd.

Plaintiff / Defendant by Counterclaim

Triton Projects Inc.

Defendant / Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Scott LaPrairie carrying on business as LaPrairie Crane

Defendant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Construction Contract Dispute — Discovery Application / Interlocutory Application for Further Disclosure and Compelled Answers at Examination for Discovery Before Master Bouck

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Triton established relevance and provided sufficient evidentiary basis under Rule 7-1(11) for broader document disclosure
  2. 2 Whether the court can compel written answers to outstanding questions from examinations for discovery
  3. 3 Whether an affidavit verifying existence and disposition of documents should be ordered

Ratio Decidendi

Triton failed to demonstrate sufficient relevance and evidentiary basis under Rule 7-1(11) for broader document disclosure; the court lacks power to compel written answers to discovery questions; there was no justification to order affidavits verifying document lists; accordingly the application for additional disclosure and compelled answers is dismissed except for items agreed by consent.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed except for terms consented to in advance of or at the hearing

Orders

  • Application dismissed except for terms consented to in advance of or at the hearing
  • No order compelling the LaPrairie parties to provide written answers to outstanding examination for discovery questions