Regarding the last document filed in the CEN BIOTE
Post# of 56323
dispensing compliance with Rules 364 and 369;
364. (1) Unless the Court orders otherwise, a person bringing a motion shall serve a motion record and file an electronic copy of or three paper copies of that record.
Marginal note:Contents of motion record
(2) A moving party's motion record shall contain, on consecutively numbered pages arranged in the following order,
(a) a table of contents;
(b) the notice of motion;
(c) all affidavits and other material served by the moving party for use on the motion;
(d) subject to rule 368, the portions of any transcripts on which the moving party intends to rely;
(e) subject to rule 366, written representations; and
(f) any other filed material that is necessary for the hearing of the motion.
Marginal note:Service and filing of motion record
(3) Subject to subsections 51(2), 163(2) and 213(3), on a motion other than a motion under rule 369, the motion record shall be served and filed at least three days before the day set out in the notice of motion for the hearing of the motion.
369. (1) A party may, in a notice of motion, request that the motion be decided on the basis of written representations.
Marginal note:Request for oral hearing
(2) A respondent to a motion brought in accordance with subsection (1) shall serve and file a respondent's record within 10 days after being served under rule 364 and, if the respondent objects to disposition of the motion in writing, indicate in its written representations or memorandum of fact and law the reasons why the motion should not be disposed of in writing.
Marginal note:Reply
(3) A moving party may serve and file written representations in reply within four days after being served with a respondent's record under subsection (2).
Marginal noteisposition of motion
(4) On the filing of a reply under subsection (3) or on the expiration of the period allowed for a reply, the Court may dispose of a motion in writing or fix a time and place for an oral hearing of the motion.
Looks like Bill basically asked for the proof of the HC response that got backdated to Feb 26, and HC has 10 days to provide the proof correct me if I'm wrong