Director had history of non-compliance with rules of procedure

Plaintiff was numbered company, who was involved in construction lien matter with defendant homeowners. Counsel for company was removed from record. Company did not comply with order to appoint new counsel, as well as failing to comply with another order. Homeowners moved to strike action, at which time court gave company another opportunity to appoint counsel. Company claimed it should have leave to appoint its director as counsel. Director had studied and practiced law in India, although he was not licensed to practice law in Canada. Company moved for leave to have director represent company. Motion dismissed. Director had history of non-compliance with rules of procedure. Director did not display understanding of applicable rule, in subject litigation. As matter was complex, director's lack of legal knowledge within Canadian system would lengthen litigation. This would lead to added expense for homeowners. There was also doubt that homeowners could recover costs, due to company's claims of limited financial resources.

6734111 Canada Inc. v. Gao (2019), 2019 CarswellOnt 6845, 2019 ONSC 2802, Barnes J. (Ont. S.C.J.).

Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca