The Plaintiff sought an Order to amend an existing Amended Statement of Claim, including the addition of a Defendant. The information which formed the basis for the Application and the Amendments was obtained through the pre-trial Discovery Process and was protected by the Implied Undertaking Rule.

Miller J. considered whether the Court’s discretion under Rule 3.74 was sufficient to set aside the protection provided by the Implied Undertaking. Miller J. rejected the argument that information obtained at pre-trial Discovery cannot be used to amend a Pleading or add parties. In granting leave to amend the Pleadings, Miller J. decided that the information sought to be used involved the “same or similar parties” and the “same or similar issues” and there was no prejudice.