Burying Your Head In The Sand Is Not A Litigation Strategy

No more disruptive innovation, please.

[1] The motion judge found that there was overwhelming evidence that the appellants were personally served and that they decided to ignore the process. There is ample evidence, including video recordings, to support the finding. It is established that a conscious decision not to participate in the proceedings bars consideration of a defence for the merits, even if one exists: Schill & Beninger Plumbing & Heating Ltd. v. Gallagher Estate (2001) 140 OAC 353.

Sunlife Assurance Company of Canada v. Premier Financial Group Incorporated (Premier Financial), 2013 ONCA 151 (Ont. C.A.) per curiam: Sharpe, Epstein and Pepall JJ.A.

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,833 other followers

%d bloggers like this: