In Derenzis v. Gore Mutual Insurance Co. (Div Ct, 2025) the Divisional Court dismissed a LAT SABS joint appeal-JR (Yatar), here where an issue was the admission in evidence of allegedly privileged affidavit "information and internal Tribunal documents that the affiant obtained as a Tribunal adjudicator".
Here the court applies civil procedure doctrine to administrative litigation, here regarding 'replies':
[68] We see no basis for interfering with the Tribunal’s order. As the Tribunal stated in the reconsideration context in E.M. and Aviva Insurance Company, 2020 CanLII 12741 (ON LAT), at para. 20:
The purpose of reply is for the party bearing the onus in the dispute to respond to any issues that were raised in the other party's submissions which could not have been reasonably raised in initial submissions. Reply is not an opportunity for the party to raise issues that should have been raised in initial submissions or to reformulate their argument.
[69] Improper reply deprives the responding party of the opportunity to provide a more particularized response and to effectively participate in the reconsideration process. Rather than being unfair to Ms. Derenzis, the Tribunal’s striking of the improper reply submissions and evidence avoided unfairness to Gore Mutual that would have resulted from its admission.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
