Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Plaintiff Harman Kular sought to proceed with a $265,000 wrongful dismissal summary trial in general chambers under two hours

• Defendant Avcorp Industries Inc. argued the matter's complexity required long chambers scheduling with adequate time allocation

• Court acknowledged institutional dysfunction in the long chambers scheduling system but declined to authorize the expedited hearing format

• Experienced counsel's opposing positions signaled the case could not be adequately adjudicated within a two-hour timeframe

• Adjournment to long chambers would enable the plaintiff to pursue additional claims including punitive damages

• Priority scheduling was granted in recognition of repeated delays in getting a hearing date

Facts and procedural background

Harman Kular brought a wrongful dismissal action against Avcorp Industries Inc. dba Latecoere Aerostructures Canada seeking $265,000 in damages. The matter came before the court on December 17, 2025, as a chambers application to determine the appropriate hearing format. The plaintiff requested that the summary trial proceed in general chambers with a hearing time of under two hours. The defendant opposed this request and insisted the matter required scheduling on the long-chambers list, which would allow for a more extended hearing.

The court noted this was an unfortunate situation arising from systemic issues. There had been a dysfunctional system for obtaining long-chambers dates, and the court acknowledged institutional responsibility for these scheduling difficulties. A new system for booking long chambers dates was anticipated to begin in 2026.

The court's ruling

The court denied the plaintiff's application to proceed in general chambers. The court determined that allowing the matter to proceed on a two-hour basis in ordinary civil chambers would not work effectively. The matter would likely keep getting bumped from the list, and even if heard, there would be insufficient time for a judge to properly adjudicate the case.

The court found it significant that the defendant was willing to take its position even though adjournment to the long-chambers list would open up additional avenues for the plaintiff, including claims for punitive damages and potentially other remedies. This confirmed the court's assessment that experienced counsel recognized the case could not be heard in under two hours, which aligned with the court's own experience.

The court ordered the matter adjourned with direction that it be set down on the long-chambers list. Recognizing the case had been repeatedly delayed, the court directed that it be given priority scheduling on the long-chambers list, particularly so it could be heard before the scheduled trial dates. No costs or damages were awarded in this procedural ruling, as the substantive wrongful dismissal claim remains to be adjudicated.