On a motion under r.53.03(4) to extend time to serve two late expert reports in an MVA action, Justice Petersen refused leave and held the plaintiff could not rely on the reports. The reports were served March 25, 2025, about four months after the November 28, 2024 pre trial and with trial set for the January 12, 2026 sittings. The court applied the r. 53.08 framework as the guiding test and found no reasonable explanation because the delay was not true inadvertence but a deliberate decision to hold off on retaining experts in hopes of settling at pre trial, and the motion itself was not pursued with diligence. Allowing the reports would materially prejudice the defendant by forcing a scramble for responding experts or require an adjournment, and any resulting postponement would be undue given the age of the case and that earlier compliance could have supported an earlier trial date.
