Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• This is a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle accident on July 31, 2023 in Oakville, in which the plaintiff seeks $950,000 in damages.

• Central to the dispute is whether Ontario courts apply a three-year baseline rule for the production of pre-accident medical records in personal injury cases.

• Proportionality was contested, with the plaintiff arguing that two years of medical records already produced were sufficient and that no evidence in those records justified further disclosure.
• Production of the plaintiff's employment file from a non-party, CENTURY 21 Leading Edge Realty Inc., was sought under Rule 30.10, which requires relevance to a material issue and unfairness if production is withheld.
• Tax records — both personal and corporate, for 2023–2024 — were ordered on consent after the plaintiff did not oppose their production.
• Costs of the motion were not resolved at the hearing; the parties were directed to attempt settlement, with written submissions permitted if needed.

Facts of the case

On July 31, 2023, a motor vehicle accident occurred in Oakville, Ontario. The plaintiff, Gregory Ebube, alleges he was rear-ended by Lee Hendricks, who was operating a vehicle owned by Lauren Hendricks. Mr. Ebube commenced an action on November 4, 2024, seeking $950,000 in damages. He alleges serious physical injuries including tearing and straining of the muscles of his lumbar, thoracic, sacral, and cervical spine, as well as injuries to his shoulders, arms, knees, buttocks, and legs. He further alleges pain in his hands and feet, headaches, dizziness, depression, anxiety, stress, frustration, insomnia, and various cognitive deficiencies. The plaintiff claims he has been forced to significantly limit his daily activities and is unable to work as a result of his injuries. The defendants admit the accident occurred but deny liability, asserting that the plaintiff was himself negligent and either caused or contributed to the accident. They also deny that the plaintiff sustained the losses alleged, and contend that any injuries have their origins in other accidents or incidents preceding or following the accident, or in endogenous causes. The Statement of Defence was filed on April 21, 2025, and examinations for discovery had not yet taken place at the time of this motion.

The motion and records at issue

The defendants brought a motion for production of various records: the plaintiff's pre-accident medical records from his physician Dr. Akinsete, the plaintiff's personal and company income tax returns, and his employment file from CENTURY 21 Leading Edge Realty Inc. A further request concerning a TD Insurance Property Damage file was initially included but did not proceed. The plaintiff consented to the production of tax records and took no position on the employment file. He opposed the production of an additional (third) year of pre-accident medical records, arguing the defendants had failed to demonstrate their relevance and that two years of records already produced were sufficient.

Policy terms and rules at issue

The motion engaged several provisions of the Rules of Civil Procedure (RRO 1990, Reg 194). Rule 30.02(1) requires parties to disclose all documents relevant to any matter in issue that are in their possession, power, or control. Rule 30.10 governs production from non-parties, permitting a court to order such production where the document is relevant to a material issue and it would be unfair to require the moving party to proceed to trial without it. Rule 29.2.03 sets out proportionality factors the court must consider, including whether production would be unreasonably time-consuming, unjustifiably expensive, unduly prejudicial, or disruptive to the orderly progress of the action, or whether the information is already available from another source.

Court's reasoning and analysis

On the medical records issue, Associate Justice Glick found that Ontario case law establishes a general three-year rule for the disclosure of pre-accident medical records in personal injury actions. The court relied on Memelli v. Bhandal, 2021 ONSC 802, Trumble v. Soomal, 2020 ONSC 8097, and Saleh v. Ambalavanar and Sambasivam, 2018 ONSC 3358, the last of which specifically described three years as a rule arising from the court's analysis of relevance in the context of Rule 29.2.03 proportionality factors. The court rejected the plaintiff's argument that producing two years was sufficient, finding no principled basis for limiting disclosure in that way. The court further noted that the presence or absence of pre-existing conditions is relevant to the claimed damages either way, citing Saleh for the principle that a defendant need not demonstrate its case before it has seen the records it seeks. Having made the order against the plaintiff directly, the court found no need to issue a separate order against Dr. Akinsete. On the CENTURY 21 employment file, the court applied the Rule 30.10 test and found the records relevant to the plaintiff's damages claim, which is a material issue. It also found that pre-trial production was necessary for a fair hearing, and that an order for production would reduce trial complexity and expense by avoiding the need to call a CENTURY 21 witness. The tax records were ordered on consent.

Ruling and overall outcome

Associate Justice Glick granted the defendants' motion in substantial part. The plaintiff was ordered to produce the third year of pre-accident medical records and his personal and company income tax records for 2023–2024. CENTURY 21 Leading Edge Realty Inc. was ordered to produce the plaintiff's employment file within thirty days of the order, with the defendants bearing the reasonable costs of that production. The defendants were the successful party on the contested issues. No specific monetary award was made in this proceeding, as the motion concerned production of records rather than the resolution of the underlying personal injury claim; costs of the motion itself were left for the parties to settle, with written submissions to follow if agreement could not be reached.