1.4: Procedural orders
3.62: Amending pleading
3.65: Permission of Court to amendment before or after close of pleadings

Case Summary

The Plaintiff, James Grenon, applied for leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim after substantial parts had been struck by a prior Order of Justice Dario. As part of the Appeals of the Order of Justice Dario, the Court of Appeal ruled that Mr. Grenon required leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim. The amendments sought by Mr. Grenon partially sought reintroduction of paragraphs struck by the Order of Justice Dario. Mr. Grenon also sought to add a new Defendant.

Mr. Grenon initially attempted to file the Amended Statement Claim in reliance on Rule 3.62, arguing that the Pleadings had not closed because no Statement of Defence had been filed, and he therefore had the right to file an Amended Statement of Claim. The Clerks of the Court rejected the filing, based on the Court of Appeal’s ruling that leave was required. Mr. Grenon applied for a Fiat to file his Amended Statement of Claim, which was denied by Applications Judge Prowse. Mr. Grenon then applied for leave to amend.

Justice Bourque considered what was required, procedurally, to file an Amended Statement of Claim given the prior Decision of the Court of Appeal. The Crown argued that the prior Decision, requiring Mr. Grenon to apply to amend, was consistent with Rules 1.4 and 3.65. Justice Bourque agreed, finding that Mr. Grenon was required to apply for leave to amend his Statement of Claim. However, he found that an Order should be granted allowing the Amended Statement of Claim to be filed.

View CanLII Details