A cornerstone of the Court of King’s Bench Rules is proportionality. This foundational principle extends to written materials that are filed in civil and family proceedings. Increasingly, there is a trend towards longer application and motion briefs, which gives rise to concerns about proportionality and even effective advocacy
To address these concerns, the Court considered imposing limits on the length of briefs. However, recognizing the wide range and varying degrees of complexity of applications and motions, for now, the court has instead opted to simply remind counsel that the most effective briefs are concise and focused. In any given case, should a judge determine that a brief is disproportionate to the nature and complexity of the issue at hand, they may request a more succinct version.
To assist in reducing the volume of material filed as written argument on applications and motions, the following cases, establishing well-known legal principles, need not be included in briefs:
• Dakota Ojibway Child and Family Services v. M.B.H., 2019 MBCA 91;
• White Burgess Langille Inman v. Abbott and Haliburton Co., 2015 SCC 23;
• Hryniak v. Mauldin, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 87; and
• RJR McDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311.
Finally, it is increasingly common that a file contains affidavits, cross-examination transcripts, and written submissions that are relevant to different scheduled hearings with a lack of information as to which party has filed which documents and for which scheduled hearing. To assist in addressing this concern, the following will now apply to these materials:
• A moving party’s brief shall include a blue cover page;
• A responding party’s brief shall include a beige cover page;
• The cover pages of all affidavits, transcripts, and motions and applications briefs must identify the nature of the motion or application in parentheses immediately below the document title.
For the purpose of transition, the foregoing only applies to documents filed after the date this practice direction comes into effect.
A Pilot Project is being undertaken as part of this Court’s ongoing commitment to enhance access to justice in the area of family law.
King’s Bench Rule 70.24(12) currently permits a judge to hear a motion or application prior to a triage conference in three emergent situations.
…
Following consultation with the Triage Implementation Committee and the Family Law Bar, it has been concluded that there shall be a fourth emergent situation where a judge may hear a pre-triage conference motion or application. This emergent situation is:
(d) extreme financial hardship of a party or a child of a party
…
This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately.
“This is a reminder that the Notice of November 14, 2014 (as attached) regarding the need to e-mail the Criminal Motion Coordinator that a contested bail review will be proceeding in the Court of King’s Bench remains in effect. As such, where counsel do not confirm by e-mail to the Criminal Motion Coordinator that a matter will be proceeding in accordance with the guidelines provided in this Notice, the application will not be heard on a contested basis.”
In order to maximize the court’s ability to offer timely trial dates, it is important that the trial coordinator be advised as soon as possible that an action scheduled for trial is resolved. As such, when an action set for trial resolves, in addition to filing a notice of discontinuance or judgment dismissing, please immediately advise the trial coordinator that the related trial dates may be released.
King’s Bench Rule 19.02(4) (as modified by Rule 19.09) provides that a party who has been noted in default need not be served with any document in the action, except where the court orders otherwise. Where a party has been noted in default and another party moves before a judge for judgment against the party in default, it should be anticipated that service of the motion for default judgment will be required in most circumstances where the claim is not for a liquidated amount. Where a liquidated amount is claimed, the presiding judge may still exercise their discretion to require service depending on the nature of the claim and evidence in support of damages. It is anticipated that related rule changes may result.
King’s Bench Rule 59.03(1) provides that any party affected by an order may prepare a draft of the formal order and shall, unless otherwise ordered by the court, send it to all other parties represented at the hearing for approval of its form.
Effective immediately, where a party is represented by counsel, unless directed otherwise by the court, counsel’s approval of the form of the draft formal order may be indicated by any of the following:
Original, copy, or digital signature of counsel indicating their consent to the form of order; or
A written representation by counsel who prepared the draft of the formal order certifying that all counsel consent to the form of order.
This Consolidated Practice Direction combines and replaces all previously issued practice-related directions, notices and other documents, with the exception of the documents listed below which remain in force and continue to be posted on the Manitoba Courts’ website:
Amended June 4th – Ordering Transcripts for matters to be heard in the Court of Appeal
This notice is intended to streamline the process for ordering transcripts when appealing from a lower court to the Court of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal requires one paper copy and one electronic copy of any transcript it is to consider on hearing an appeal, unless a judge orders otherwise. Pursuant to both rule 16(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules (Civil) and rule 11(1)(a) of the Manitoba Criminal Appeal Rules, an appellant is required to provide confirmation that the necessary transcripts have been ordered at the time the initiating document is filed.
Effective immediately, this confirmation shall be in the form of a completed court transcript order request, which is to accompany the notice of appeal or initiating notice of motion at the time of filing.
In order to accommodate members of the Bar who wish to attend the 40th anniversary celebration of the Family Division, the Child Protection Docket will be closed on Friday, June 21, 2024.
The Manitoba Law Library would like to acknowledge with gratitude that we are situated on Treaty One Territory, the traditional lands of the Anishinaabe, Cree and Dakota peoples, and the homeland of the Métis Nation.
Printing and Photocopying
If you need to use the library’s printing and photocopying services you will need to create an account. See us at the front desk for assistance.
Great LEXpectations RSS Feed