The Governing Council of the University of Toronto v. Easy Group Inc. D/B/A Easy Education, 2025 FC 1728
Justice Whyte Nowak - 2025-10-27
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
This is an appeal of an Order of Case Management Judge 2024 FC 206. The Decision involves rulings made by the Motions Judge on motions to compel answers to questions which were refused on examinations for discovery in the context of a copyright infringement action. For the reasons that follow, I find that the Defendants have not shown any palpable and overriding error in the Decision that would justify this Court’s intervention. Accordingly, the Defendants’ motion is dismissed. ... While the questions appear to be based on the hallmarks of factual inquiry (“who, what, when and where”), the true usefulness of any answer to the Disputed Questions lies in what the Plaintiffs say amounts to infringement, which calls for a legal position or argument. The Motions Judge was alive to the distinction between disguised fact and argument and appropriately referred to judicial authorities addressing this distinction. The authorities he cited note that what may look “on the surface like a mere collection of facts” is not, since the particular facts that will be relied upon are based upon a view of the law.
Decision relates to:
- T-948-22 - The Governing Council of the University of Toronto et Al. v. Easy Group Inc.