How have courts dealt with a motion to stay a summary judgment?

More recently, in Ghaffari v. Asiyaban, [See Note 39 below] J.E. Ferguson J. dismissed a motion to stay a summary judgment motion on the ground it was premature and inappropriate. The summary judgment motion was brought prior to examinations for discovery and involved the single issue of when the plaintiff had discovered her cause of action. In the course of her decision, J.E. Ferguson J. applied the following approach to the motion to stay: I agree with the defence submissions as to the test a party must meet in order to obtain a stay (I was told that there is no case law yet on the point) which is as follows: (i) the court should look at the motion for summary judgment and the reasonable chances of success in determining whether a stay is appropriate. The party seeking the stay should put their best foot forward as they would on a motion for summary judgment to say there is a genuine issue requiring a trial or why the matter is too complicated for the motion judge to ascertain the full appreciation of the case; (ii) the court then ought to determine whether the matter is complicated; what are the issues; the nature of the evidence and law to determine the issues; and whether the case can be determined without the necessity of a full trial; and (iii) only in the clearest of cases should the court impose a stay. [See Note 40 below] B. A case-management approach to dealing with concerns about lengthy, complex summary judgment motions brought on the Commercial List