This was an Application under Rule 3.68 by the Defendants, who sought to strike the Plaintiff’s Amended Statement of Claim on the basis that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action. The Plaintiff was self-represented and had filed an extensive 252-paragraph Amended Statement of Claim naming 38 Defendants, including individuals associated with the Workers’ Compensation Board of Alberta (“WCB”), physicians, chiropractors, and physiotherapists.

The Court held that the pleadings failed to disclose any reasonable claim, as contemplated in Rule 3.68(2)(b). Justice Michalyshyn emphasized that on a Rule 3.68 Application, only material facts, not bare assertions or speculation, are to be taken as true. The Court confirmed that pleadings must identify the “who, when, where, how and what” giving rise to each Defendant’s liability, and cannot rely on conclusions or general accusations.

The Court found the Plaintiff’s allegations to be largely bald assertions and legal conclusions lacking the necessary particulars of duty, breach, causation, or damages. Allegations of fraud, defamation, and conspiracy were also struck for want of the specific particulars required by law.

With respect to the WCB Defendants, the Court found it had no jurisdiction, pursuant to sections 17 and 21 of the Workers’ Compensation Act, RSA 2000, c W-15, as the Board possesses exclusive statutory jurisdiction over such matters. The claims against the physician, physiotherapist, and chiropractor Defendants were also struck for failing to plead facts capable of establishing the elements of negligence or any other recognized cause of action.

The Court declined to permit further amendment, noting that the Plaintiff had already been granted such an opportunity and had instead expanded the claim to an even more deficient pleading. Accordingly, all claims were struck under Rule 3.68, and the Court invited written submissions on costs.