The plaintiffs were involved in two accidents: one took place in Ontario, and the other took place in Georgia, USA. They commenced an Ontario action for damages in relation to both accidents. The Georgia defendants brought a motion to dismiss the action as against them on the basis that Ontario courts did not have jurisdiction over the Georgia loss. Justice Woollcombe considered the Van Breda factors, and held that there were insufficient factors connecting the Georgia matter to Ontario. The claim was dismissed as against the moving defendants. In obiter, Justice Woollcombe noted that Ontario would have been a convenient venue for the claim given that all treatment was received in Ontario, most witnesses were located in Ontario, and proceeding in Georgia would result in a multiplicity of claims.