The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently criticized defence counsel for using an outdated approach to trial preparation in a slip and fall case, underscoring that lawyers have a duty to conduct litigation efficiently in the interests of their clients, the courts, and the justice system as a whole.
In Hicken et al. v. Abbot Chiropractic and Health Care et al., 2026 ONSC 1244, the plaintiff suffered a displaced clavicular fracture requiring surgery after a fall in the parking lot of her chiropractor’s office. She sought general damages, as well as damages for loss of competitive advantage and housekeeping capacity. Her mother brought a related claim under Ontario’s Family Law Act for the assistance she provided to her daughter. Liability and damages were both disputed, and the parties requested 20 days of civil jury time, placing the matter on the January 2026 trial blitz list.
Pre-trial developments and delays
At a December 30, 2025 pre-trial, the court learned that defence counsel had gone on leave and replacement counsel from the same firm had scheduling conflicts. The trial was adjourned to May 2026, with a trial management conference set for February 9, 2026. At the TMC, both lawyers appeared without their clients. Defence counsel could not recall attending the previous pre-trial and admitted he had not reviewed the plaintiff’s December 17, 2025 request to admit or the January 29, 2026 proposed joint document brief, stating he would address both closer to trial. He was otherwise unprepared to discuss trial management issues.
Court’s findings
Justice Laura B. Stewart found that the TMC resulted in no meaningful progress. In her reasons, she described the defence approach as outdated and inconsistent with modern expectations of trial preparation in Ontario. The judge noted that leaving all preparation until the last moment wasted judicial time, increased costs for all parties, and hindered the court’s ability to manage its schedule.
Since the defence declined to engage with the request to admit and the proposed document brief, the court was unable to determine the actual length of trial required. The judge ordered that another exit pre-trial be scheduled three to four weeks before the May 2026 sittings and emphasized the purpose of trial management: to minimize inefficiency, reduce wasted resources, and enable the court to accommodate as many matters as possible.
Lessons for litigators
Justice Stewart’s decision serves as a reminder that effective advocacy includes cooperation, preparation, and respect for court processes. Lawyers must balance their duty to advance their clients’ interests with their broader responsibilities to the justice system.
At Flaherty McCarthy LLP, we understand that preparation and efficiency are critical in every stage of litigation. In all of our work, we prioritize readiness, collaboration, and strategic focus to achieve the best possible outcomes while respecting the court’s time and our clients’ resources.
