here. - Koskie Minsky LLP

38 1823 643 -
644
39 1827 647 -
648
40 2560 -
2562
865 -
866
To advise if there is anything beyond that which has already
been discussed or set out in the Statement of Defence (marked
as Exhibit “B”) that is relied on in support of para. 57 in terms
of how the defendant carried out the functions referred to in
this paragraph.
To advise as to what facts the defendant relies on in support of
the pleas in paras. 57 - 65 of the Statement of Defence (marked
as Exhibit “B”), and to advise as to how the defendant intends
to prove those facts.
Regarding para. 62 of the Statement of Defence (marked as
Exhibit “B”), to advise as to the material facts relied on to say
that the defendant's conduct from 1945 to 2009 met the
standard of care, and to advise as to what the defendant's
position of what that standard of care was during the class
period.
To determine whether
there is anything beyond
that which has already
been revealed to the
plaintiffs on which the
defendant substantiates its
claim that the defendant’s
funding, operation
management,
administration and control
of HRC was to the benefit
of the residents of HRC.
To determine the basis on
which the defendant
substantiates its claim in
its statement of defence
that it met the standard of
care.
To determine the basis on
which the defendant
substantiates its claim in
its statement of defence
that it met the standard of
care.
Duty of Care –Fiduciary Duty
41 1833 649 To advise as to whether the defendant concedes that if the
events described in para. 67 of the Statement of Defence
(marked as Exhibit “B”) occurred, whether this would
constitute either a breach of the duty of care or a breach of the
fiduciary duty or both.
To ascertain the
defendant’s position with
respect to the contents of
its duty of care.