Leigh v. Belfast Mini-Mills
The court refused plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment on the pleadings and on evidence and dismissed the abuse of process and conversion-to-application motions because the defence disclosed a legitimate basis and material facts were in dispute; delay and use of FOIPOP material did not amount to abuse; the action should remain as an action to preserve jury rights and permit fuller discovery; the court ordered resumption of discovery and compelled plaintiffs to answer specified lines of questioning and to produce specified documents (EHS calls, RCMP files for 2004–2006, certain medical/naturopath/Dr. Boucher records) subject to relevancy and privilege rules; costs reserved.
- Citation
- 2011 NSSC 300
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Gillian Leigh; Plaintiff: Wanda Cummings; Plaintiff: Toltec Holdings Incorporated carrying on business as Mabou Ridge Centre for Holistic Living; Defendant: Belfast Mini-Mills Ltd.; Defendant: International Spinners Ltd.
- Court
- Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 July 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Litigation Contract and Negligence / Interlocutory Motions (summary Judgment, Abuse of Process, Discovery/disclosure Disputes)
- Outcome
- Plaintiffs' motions dismissed in full; discovery and production orders granted in part in favour of defendants; action to proceed as action (not converted) and defence not struck.
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Abuse of Process, Discovery and Undertakings, Relevancy and Privilege, Conversion of Action to Application, Production of FOIPOP Materials, Right to Jury Trial
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gillian Leigh
Plaintiff
Wanda Cummings
Plaintiff
Toltec Holdings Incorporated carrying on business as Mabou Ridge Centre for Holistic Living
Plaintiff
Belfast Mini-Mills Ltd.
Defendant
International Spinners Ltd.
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Litigation Contract and Negligence / Interlocutory Motions (summary Judgment, Abuse of Process, Discovery/disclosure Disputes)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants' statement of defence should be struck or summary judgment entered for the plaintiffs
- 2 Whether the defendants' conduct constituted an abuse of process (including allegations of delay and misuse of FOIPOP material)
- 3 Whether the action should be converted to an application
Ratio Decidendi
The court refused plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment on the pleadings and on evidence and dismissed the abuse of process and conversion-to-application motions because the defence disclosed a legitimate basis and material facts were in dispute; delay and use of FOIPOP material did not amount to abuse; the action should remain as an action to preserve jury rights and permit fuller discovery; the court ordered resumption of discovery and compelled plaintiffs to answer specified lines of questioning and to produce specified documents (EHS calls, RCMP files for 2004–2006, certain medical/naturopath/Dr. Boucher records) subject to relevancy and privilege rules; costs reserved.
Court Disposition
Plaintiffs' motions dismissed in full; discovery and production orders granted in part in favour of defendants; action to proceed as action (not converted) and defence not struck.
Orders
- Plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment, to strike the defence, to find abuse of process, and to convert the action to an application are dismissed
- Plaintiffs Gillian Leigh and Wanda Cummings must attend for resumption of discovery and answer questions including: whether Leigh provided counselling to Cummings; visits by RCMP or emergency health services to plaintiffs' home; alcohol consumption of either plaintiff; knowledge of Cummings being ejected or banned...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment