Effective immediately, the Civil Motion Coordinator (Cheryl Laniuk) is to be contacted (phone number – 204-945-3043) regarding the scheduling of all civil motions, including those returnable on the civil uncontested list, contested motions and seized motions.
Coming into effect
This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately.
Original notice available here.
The Court has recently issued the following Practice Direction and Notice:
Practice Direction
Comprehensive Amendments to Court of Queen’s Bench Rules (Family) Effective February 1, 2019
The Court of Queen’s Bench will be introducing a new model for scheduling and case flow management in respect of non-child protection family proceedings. The implementation date is February 1, 2019. The model is designed to enhance the capacity of all Manitobans to better access justice in the area of family law within a system that will be significantly less complex, less slow and less expensive. The New Model for Scheduling and Case Flow (New FD Model) is expected to achieve that goal by ensuring that those cases that can be resolved will be resolved at the earliest point possible. Where otherwise contested matters cannot be resolved, the New FD Model will ensure that those matters are adjudicated within a predictable and finite period of time, mindful of what will be stable and consistent reference points or “meaningful events”, which events will themselves be governed by clear, identifiable and predictable timelines. (Download full Practice Direction here.)
Notice
The Practice Direction regarding the New Model for Scheduling and Case Flow Management of Non-Child Protection Family Division Matters will come into force effective immediately.
Both notices are dated December 17, 2018.
Provincial government offices will be closed for the full day on Monday, December 24, 2018. In light of this closure, all Court of Queen’s Bench Registry offices in Manitoba will be closed on December 24, 2018 and reopen on Thursday December 27, 2018.
Documents subject to a filing deadline of December 24, 2018 will now be calculated to have a filing deadline of December 27, 2018.
Please note that parties must commence legal proceedings within specified limitation periods and that this notice does not change limitation deadlines.
Original notice available here.
The Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench has issued the following practice direction regarding pre-trial briefs in civil actions:
When the Queen’s Bench Rules were most recently amended, the requirement to file a responding pre-trial brief was changed to the following:
Responding pre-trial brief
50.02(6) Any party to the action that wishes to file a responding pre-trial brief at the first pre-trial conference must file the brief with the court and serve it on all other parties at least seven days before the pre-trial conference.
The impetus for this amendment was to reconcile the issue of the responding party filing a pre-trial brief with the introduction of the screening function provided in Rule 50.04, wherein it was considered disproportionate to require the filing of a responding pre-trial brief if it was the responding party’s position that the pre-trial conference ought not to proceed. There has been an increasing number of pre-trial conferences where there is no suggestion that the pre-trial conference ought not to proceed, but the responding party has not filed a responding pre-trial brief on the basis of Rule 50.02(6). It was always anticipated that prudent practice would dictate that where an action is properly at a pre-trial conference, the responding party would file a pre-trial brief.
Given the potential disruption to the pre-trial conference process of not having responding pre-trial briefs, pending review of a related rule amendment by the Statutory Rules Committee, it is now directed that the responding party to a scheduled pre-trial conference file a pre-trial brief with the court and serve it on all other parties at least seven days before the pre-trial conference. Where it is the responding party’s position that the pre-trial conference ought not to proceed, the responding party, in the pre-trial brief, may indicate this position, along with its reasons. Where the responding party does not object to the pre-trial conference proceeding, the responding party’s brief must respond to the pre-trial brief of the party who sought the pre-trial conference, 2 including a response to the statement of the factual and legal issues in the action and the estimated duration of the trial. The responding party’s pre-trial brief should also address any pre-trial orders or directions that may be sought from the pre-trial judge.
Coming into effect
This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately.
The Court recently published Version 5 of the Mandatory Standard Clauses for Family Division Orders. The use of standard clauses has been mandatory since 1998.
Version 5 of the Standard Clauses reflects legislative changes that have come into force since the release of Version 4 of the Standard Clauses and contains many other changes to clause wording and footnotes. The terms used in the applicable legislative and regulatory provisions and Rules were taken into account as clauses were drafted.
Be sure to read the entire notice for full instructions.
The Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench has issued a notice of amendments to the QB Rules which will come into force on April 1, 2018:
RE: AMENDMENTS TO COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH RULES
The following amendments regarding service, proof of service and default in cases involving the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (the Hague Service Convention) will come into force on April 1, 2018.
…
The objectives of the amendments are to clarify the Rules respecting service (including substituted service, dispensation with service and validation and proof of service) and noting default, and granting and setting aside of default judgment, in cases where service is required under the Hague Service Convention.
The full text of these Rule amendments (M.R. No. 11/2018) can be viewed here.
Great LEXpectations RSS Feed