Overview of Adamski v. Costco Wholesale Canada Ltd.
In Adamski v. Costco Wholesale Canada Ltd. (2025 ONSC 1769), the Ontario Superior Court of Justice refused a defence request to adjourn both the pre-trial conference and the trial. The motion arose from a late Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (WSIA) section 31 application brought shortly before key trial milestones.
Justice Kalajdzic determined that the trial should proceed as scheduled, concluding that an adjournment would not serve the interests of justice. Her reasons are consistent with prior Ontario decisions, including Kumra v. Stagliano (2022 ONSC 5252) and Field v. Zainab (2022 ONSC 2759), where courts declined to delay trials due to late procedural steps.
Timeline of the Workplace Harassment Claim
Wallace Smith Lawyers began representing Ms. Adamski in November 2018 in an action against her former employer and three co-workers, alleging workplace harassment and wrongful dismissal.
Discoveries were completed in 2021, and the Trial Record was served in March 2023. With the consent of both parties, the matter was scheduled for trial in May 2023.
On October 31, 2024—more than a year after the trial date was fixed—the defendants commenced a WSIA section 31 application seeking a determination that certain claims were barred. Relying on that application, they brought a motion under Rule 52.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to adjourn the trial indefinitely pending a decision from the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).
The Motion to Adjourn
The adjournment motion was heard on February 28, 2025. At that time:
- The pre-trial conference was scheduled for April 15, 2025;
- The trial was set to begin on May 12, 2025; and
- All undertakings had been completed and expert reports exchanged.
Although the WSIAT intake process had begun, no hearing date had been scheduled.
The court also considered Ms. Adamski’s personal circumstances. She is a single mother receiving ODSP benefits and was unable to access recommended psychological treatment without progress toward resolution of the litigation.
Legal Framework and Positions of the Parties
Under Rule 52.02, a court deciding whether to adjourn a trial must weigh the interests of the parties alongside the broader administration of justice.
The defendants argued that:
- A WSIAT ruling was necessary to determine the scope of the civil claims;
- An adjournment would promote procedural fairness and efficiency; and
- Any prejudice to the plaintiff could be compensated through costs or pre-judgment interest.
On behalf of the plaintiff, we submitted that further delay—after more than six years of litigation—would cause serious harm that could not be remedied financially. The section 31 application, we argued, was brought very late and without a satisfactory explanation.
The Court’s Decision
Justice Kalajdzic rejected the adjournment request, finding that:
- The defendants knew, or ought to have known, of a potential WSIA defence well before October 2024;
- Defence counsel acknowledged that the section 31 application could have been brought earlier; and
- Although there is no limitation period for section 31 applications, that fact did not justify raising the issue on the eve of trial.
While acknowledging that WSIA jurisdictional issues are often addressed before trial, the Court emphasized that indefinite delays undermine confidence in the civil justice system. Justice Kalajdzic noted that financial remedies such as interest or costs cannot replace timely access to justice, particularly where delay affects a vulnerable litigant’s ability to obtain treatment and move forward.
Relying on the Court of Appeal’s decision in Barbiero v. Pollak (2024 ONCA 904), the Court reiterated the importance of a cultural shift toward more efficient resolution of disputes. Fixing a trial date, she wrote, signals that preliminary matters have been addressed and that the case is ready to proceed.
Outcome
The motion to adjourn was dismissed with costs. The decision serves as a reminder that late procedural steps, including delayed WSIA applications, will not necessarily justify postponing a long-scheduled civil trial.
Employment Law and Workplace Harassment Litigation
Wallace Smith Lawyers represents employees in workplace harassment and wrongful dismissal matters across Ontario. We assist clients in navigating civil claims alongside WSIA and WSIAT issues, with a focus on advancing cases efficiently and fairly.