The Court refused the defendants' application to adjourn a hearing to obtain additional expert evidence (metallurgist and occupational hygienist) regarding a metal box central to the plaintiff's case. The refusal was based on the defendants' failure to investigate the issue prior to hearing despite it being a live issue they themselves raised, the insufficiency of evidence demonstrating the utility of the proposed expert evidence, the considerable delay (estimated at least six months) that would result, and proportionality concerns given the amount in dispute.
The full text is available to signed-in members.