J. 2001 SKQB 282 Q.B. A.D. 1998 No. 112 J.C.S. IN THE QUEEN'S BENCH JUDICIAL CENTRE OF SASKATOON L. R. B. APPLICANT (PLAINTIFF) and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA RESPONDENT (DEFENDANT) and LES OBLATS de MARIE IMMACULEE du MANITOBA RESPONDENT (DEFENDANT BY CROSS-CLAIM) and THE ARCHIEPISCOPAL CORPORATION OF REGINA and THE ARCHBISHOP OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF REGINA representing THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH THIRD PARTIES B.M. Singer, Q.C. for the applicant (plaintiff) N. Gunningham-Kapphahn for the Attorney General of Canada respondent (defendant) J.G. Brick for Les Oblats de Marie Immaculee du Manitoba FIAT DIELSCHNEIDER J. June 6, 2001 [1] The applicant applies for an order severing the issues raised by his claim from those raised by the cross-claim and third party proceedings so that his claim may at this time proceed to trial. [2] In bringing this application the plaintiff asserts that he is ready for trial. Indeed he states he has been ready for trial for some considerable period of time and that he is standing by while the issues of the cross-claim and third party proceedings which are of no concern to him are debated. [3] The defendant, Les Oblats de Marie Immaculee du Manitoba, is also ready for trial (except for some minor matters) and concurs that the issues raised by the claim of the plaintiff should proceed to trial at this time. [4] The Attorney General of Canada vigorously opposes severance on the ground that the Government of Canada would be prejudiced in its claim for apportionment of the amount of any judgment as between the Government of Canada and Les Oblats de Marie Immaculee du Manitoba. [5] It is quite apparent to me from the material and from the arguments of counsel that the pursuit of the issues of cross-claim and the third party proceedings, meritorious as that pursuit may be, will nevertheless result in the expenditure of, in my judgment, a very lengthy period of time. [6] Meanwhile the plaintiff is stalled in the pursuit of resolution of the issues of his claim. Not only the plaintiff but as well hundreds of other claimants who have been asked by the management pre-trial judge appointed in this case to regard the plaintiff's action as a test case are standing by pending a judgment whereby they will be able to measure the success or failure of their claims. [7] have read the minutes of the pre-trial management proceedings conducted by my colleague Maurice J. of this Court and am satisfied that this action and the other actions pending resolution of this action will be fairly dealt with under the Rules. In my opinion, and want to be emphatic about this, the fears of procedural unfairness expressed by counsel for the Attorney General if the issues are severed are groundless. [8] Moreover, am in total agreement with my colleague Noble J. of this Court who in his judgment dealing with other issues of this action took the time to express his concerns over the delay the plaintiff had up to that time been subjected to by the paper war conducted by the parties to the cross-claim and third party proceedings (see Noble J.'s judgment dated November 23, 2000). [9] I am satisfied that it is in the best interests of justice that the order of severance sought by the plaintiff should be granted so that the issue raised in the action may proceed to an early trial. [10] I therefore order that the plaintiff's claim shall proceed to trial separate from, and before, the trial of the issues raised in the cross-claim and the third party claim in this action.
FIAT. The applicant applied for an order severing the issues from those raised by the cross-claim and third party proceedings so that his claim may proceed to trial. The Attorney General opposed severance on the ground the Government of Canada would be prejudiced in its claim for apportionment of the amount of any judgment as between the Government of Canada and the Oblates. HELD: It was in the best interests of justice that the order of severance be granted so the issue may proceed to an early trial. The issues of cross-claim and third party proceedings will take a very lengthy period of time. Hundreds of other claimants who have been asked by the management pre-trial judge to regard the plaintiff's action as a test case were awaiting a judgment.