Formal Discovery Planning And Agreement On Deadline For Answering Undertakings – Kariouk V. Pombo, 2012 ONSC 939 (Canlii)

This was a decision on a motion to compel answers to undertakings in a home renovation case. It was conceded that there was no formal discovery plan and no agreed upon deadline for answering undertakings. The primary issue of contention therefore was whether or not the motion was necessary. After the motion was launched, the majority of the undertakings were answered. At the time of the hearing, it was simply necessary to set a deadline for the remaining answers, to rule on the sufficiency of certain others and to deal with costs.

The court stated that the interplay between the Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules of Professional Conduct, Principles of Civility and Professionalism and the relatively new requirement for formal discovery planning is important and that the attempt to use principles of civility to counter reliance on the rules of civil procedure required comment.