Summary

37227

Leo Kai Yen Wong v. Grant Mitchell Law Corporation, et al.

(Manitoba) (Civil) (By Leave)

Keywords

None.

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Civil procedure – Orders – Motions to amend, set aside or vary – In a civil case, is intervening causation not a factor when compared to a criminal case and are damages to be based solely on the original causation even when it had become a moot issue due to the existence of an intervening causation? – Should Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench Rules 59.06(1) and 59.06(2) be interpreted strictly, and past masters’ and judges’ interpretations ignored? – Whether trial and appeal were unfair because courts failed to provide adequate assistance to self-represented litigant.

In the judgment giving rise to a R. 59.06 motion to amend, set aside, or vary under the Manitoba civil procedure rules, the judge found Mr. Wong’s lawyers negligent for failing to file a medical malpractice claim prior to the expiry of the statutory limitation period. However, he also found that the proposed action would not have been successful and, accordingly, awarded only nominal damages of $100, plus prejudgment interest. Mr. Wong did not bring an appeal from that judgment, instead bringing the motion under R. 59.06. The grounds for the motion were two-fold: that the judge erred in his assessment of the merits of the medical malpractice claim by failing to consider that Mr. Wong could prove damages on the theory that his illness was a result of an intervening cause; and that Mr. Wong’s trial was unfair because the judge failed to provide him with adequate assistance as a self-represented litigant.

The Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench dismissed the R. 59.06 motion, the judge considering himself to be functus officio. The Manitoba Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the two allegations of error by the judge below could only be heard and considered in an appeal of the judgment which the applicant had not sought, and not on a motion brought under R. 59.06.

Lower Court Rulings

September 9, 2015
Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba

CI 12-01-77745, 2015 MBQB 146
Applicant’s motion to amend, set aside, or vary judgment, dismissed.
June 14, 2016
Court of Appeal of Manitoba

AI16-30-08530, 2016 MBCA 65
Applicant’s appeal, dismissed.
 

loading