Federal Court Refuses To Schedule A Summary Trial If No Significant Savings Of Cost Or Time

As part of our series on summary proceedings in IP cases, we previously commented on the Federal Court of Appeal's guidance on when and how a court should determine if summary trial is appropriate. In this post, we consider Associate Judge Horne's recent decision in Toronto-Dominion Bank v Dyas("TD Bank"), which deals with when a Case Management Judge should schedule (or refuse to schedule) a summary trial.

In TD Bank, Associate Judge Horne refused to schedule a summary trial notwithstanding that the defendant was presumptively able to bring a motion for summary trial pursuant to Rule 213 of the Federal Courts Rules because a trial date had yet to be set. Associate Judge Horne relied on his previous decision in Janssen v Sandoz, in holding that a Case Management Judge has residual discretion to refuse to schedule a summary trial in "rare circumstances", and he found such circumstances were met in TD Bank.