Kular v. Avcorp Industries Ltd.

2025 BCSC 2582 Kular v. Avcorp Industries Inc.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Kular v. Avcorp Industries Inc., 2025 BCSC 2582 Date: 20251217 Docket: S251055 Registry: Vancouver Between: Harman Kular Plaintiff And: Avcorp Industries Inc. dba Latecoere Aerostructures Canada Defendant Before: The Honourable Justice Morley Oral Reasons for Judgment (In Chambers) Counsel for the Plaintiff: E. Brandt Counsel for the Defendant: J. Wong Place and Date of Trial/Hearing: Vancouver, B.C. December 17, 2025 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, B.C. December 17, 2025 [1] THE COURT: I am going to give brief oral reasons. [2] The issue before me is whether this summary trial for $265,000 on a wrongful dismissal matter should be heard in general chambers in under two hours, as the plaintiff urges, or if it must be set down for long chambers as the defendant says is necessary. [3] This is an unfortunate situation. The court institutionally has to take some responsibility for the fact that there has been a dysfunctional system for getting long‑chambers dates, because if that system were working, there would not be much doubt that both parties would be better off setting it down for long chambers. [4] We are going to have a new system in terms of just booking the dates in 2026, and I am hopeful, and I think I express this hope on behalf of the court as a whole, that this will work better. [5] Recognizing this

institutional responsibility, I still think I need to say "no" to the plaintiff seeking to have this heard today on the ordinary chambers list. If I were to just say "yes", that this can go ahead on a two‑hour basis in the ordinary civil chambers, I do not think that would work. The matter would just keep getting bumped and, if it is heard, there will not be enough time for a judge to do it justice. [6] The very fact that the defendant is willing to take that position, even though if I do adjourn this and say it has to go down on the long chambers list, that would open up other avenues for the plaintiff, including punitive damages and maybe other claims, confirms me in thinking that experienced counsel are looking at this and saying this is not going to be something that can be heard in under two hours. That is consistent with my experience as well. [7] So I am going to order that this be adjourned with the direction that it be set down on the long-chambers list. [8] You can indicate to Scheduling that I recognize that this has been put off and off, and so I am going to ask that there be some priority to it on the long‑chambers list, especially so that it can be heard before the scheduled trial dates. "J. G. Morley, J." The Honourable Justice Morley