Thomas v. Elliott, (1998) 221 A.R. 48 (QBM)

CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
Case DateMarch 31, 1998
Citations(1998), 221 A.R. 48 (QBM)

Thomas v. Elliott (1998), 221 A.R. 48 (QBM)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] A.R. TBEd. JL.106

Joseph Thomas and Aleyamma Thomas (plaintiffs) v. Randy Orlando Todd Elliott (defendant)

(Action No. 9603-25822)

Indexed As: Thomas v. Elliott

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Funduk, Master in Chambers

March 31, 1998.

Summary:

The plaintiffs sued the defendant following a motor vehicle accident. During exami­nation for discovery, the defendant's counsel gave an undertaking to produce a statement made to police concerning the accident. The defendant subsequently applied to withdraw the undertaking.

A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 4153

Relations with other lawyers - Undertak­ings - Withdrawal - The plaintiffs sued the defendant following a motor vehicle acci­dent - During examination for discovery, the defendant's counsel gave an undertak­ing to produce a statement made to police concerning the accident - The defendant subsequently applied to withdraw the undertaking - A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - To be relieved of an under­taking one had to show that the undertak­ing was given inadvertently (i.e., uninten­tionally), that the undertaking should not have been given and that the other side had not been prejudiced (or make an offer to repair the prejudice) - Here the test was not met where all the defendant's counsel could say was that he misconceived the law on whether the accident statement was privileged.

Cases Noticed:

Alberta Association of Psychologists v. Schepanovich (1991), 45 C.P.C.(2d) 108 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

Robinson v. MacWilliams and Levesque (1997), 197 A.R. 394 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 6].

Uvanile v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Co. (1984), 44 C.P.C. 110 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

Counsel:

W.R. Shaw (Shaw & Tamke), for the plaintiffs;

G.W. Jaycock (Parlee McLaws), for the defendant.

This application was heard before Funduk, Master in Chambers, of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmon­ton, who delivered the following judgment on March 31, 1998.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT