a Statement of Claim, then took virtually no steps to prosecute the action. He
did not request a defence. He ignored correspondence from defence counsel
and adjusters. Counsel became aware the case would be dismissed in August,
2011 and initially sought to note the defendants in default, although he was
aware by September, 2011 that the case had been dismissed and he could not
note the defendants in default. After the case was administratively dismissed
in August, 2011, he did not inform his clients for more than 2.5 years, until
February, 2014. There is no evidence the plaintiffs contacted their lawyer in
this two year period to inquire about the status of the case. The notice of
motion to set aside the dismissal was served in February, 2014; the motion
record was served in June, 2014. The motion was argued in June and December, 2015.
 She found no satisfactory explanation for the delay and
noted the complete lack of action by the lawyer and the absence
of evidence from the appellants [at paras. 52 and 53]:
The evidence does not establish inadvertence. The motion was not brought
promptly. The lawyer’s tickler system was completely inadequate, and was
a missed deadline waiting to happen.
There is evidence of reliance by Barbon and Ramon on the finality of the
order and the intervenor stands to be added for the first time seven years
after the accident. In addition, this is not a case which would depend on
documents, but one which would depend on witnesses. Seven years after the
accident, the case is at the pleadings stage.
 After considering the relevant factors, the SCJ was entitled to conclude as she did.
 For these reasons, I would dismiss the appeal. The appellants
are to pay each of the respondents $7,500 in costs of the appeal,
inclusive of taxes and disbursements. I see no reason to interfere
with the costs order made by the SCJ and would decline leave.
Aquilina v. Aquilina et al.*
[Indexed as: Aquilina v. Aquilina]
2018 ONSC 3607
Superior Court of Justice, Dunphy J. June 8, 2018
Family law — Property — Equalization of net family property — Election — Surviving spouse applying to extend time for electing between
* Vous trouverez la traduction française à la p. 634, post.