Can a party argue that a response to an undertaking has materially advanced the action?

In Ravvin Holdings v. Ghitter 2008 ABCA 208, the court found that it is always open to a party to argue that a response to an undertaking or several responses considered collectively, has materially advanced the action, regardless of whether all of the undertakings given at discovery have been responded to. The court noted, at paragraph 29, that “often the provision of a response, which may include financial information such as income tax returns or accounting records, will cause a party to reconsider its position and provide a basis for early settlement discussions.” The court pointed out that it may not be practical to provide all of the responses to undertakings at the same time, as some undertakings might be more extensive than others or could involve work done by professionals, such as accountants. The court said that it is quite common for parties to adjourn examinations for discovery on the understanding that, if anything further comes up in response to an undertaking, discoveries will continue. The court noted that the initial examination for discovery materially advances an action and the same logic applies to undertakings. It held that a response to an undertaking is generally a thing that advances an action unless it has been filed to deliberately drag out the process of providing it to delay the lawsuit, or it is perfunctory, or designed to thwart rather than advance the ultimate resolution of litigation.