Maximir Luburic successfully secured an order compelling three actions: that one of the plaintiffs attend a further defence medical with an orthopedic surgeon; that both plaintiffs produce their diagnostic imaging, which had been requested at their Examinations for Discovery; and that the plaintiffs re-attend court to answer questions arising from the undertakings.
The plaintiffs’ counsel argued that the further defence medical was unnecessary since a physiatrist has already given one. They also argued that producing the diagnostic imaging would be prejudicial to the plaintiffs. They would not produce the diagnostic imaging to the defendants, but to a doctor who was performing a defence medical approved by the plaintiffs’ counsel. They also argued that further discoveries were unnecessary. The court rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments. You can read more about the case at: Han et al v. Elliott et al, 2022 ONSC 857.