In the case of Huachangda Canada Holdings Inc. v Solcz Group Inc. dated April 9, 2023, which was presided over by Justice Osborne, involved the defendant Solcz Group Inc. ("Solcz") and the plaintiff Huachangda Canada Holdings Inc. The dispute had revolved around documents related to contracts between 2006 and 2016 by Valiant TMS, a business acquired by the Plaintiff. Solcz, the defendant, had sought an order using Rule 30.06 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to require the Plaintiffs to produce specific documents yearly for the top five contracts by bid price in those years. Plaintiffs had alleged that Solcz had committed financial fraud, causing damages of around $130 million. The dispute had centered on the Porsche Agreement, an agreement between the plaintiff subsidiary TMS Turnkey Manufacturing Solutions GmbH ("TMS") and Porsche AG. The plaintiffs had claimed that the Porsche Agreement had been outside the ordinary course of business and that Solcz's books had been inaccurate, leading to a fraudulent breach of the Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) representations. Justice Osborne had concluded that the documents in the latter two of the four categories should be produced. The Defendant's request for documents from the top five contracts over a ten-year period had been deemed reasonable and proportionate. It was also ordered the production of the specified documents, acknowledging that the first two categories had been conceded. The Defendant, having been successful, had been awarded costs of $26,000.