The Appellant appealed the decision of a Trial Judge which rejected their Application to amend the Statement of Claim filed in the Action. The proposed amendments set out allegations of instances where the Respondent had acted in breach of various Court Orders. The Trial Judge initially held that the proposed amendments did not set out a cause of action, and as such were not permitted.

The Court considered Rule 13.6(2)(a), which provides that a pleading in an action must state the facts upon which a party relies. The Court also provided a summary of caselaw, which set out that it is trite law that a statement of claim need not name the specific causes of actions that the Plaintiff is intending to raise; and that an amendment should be allowed if it is arguable even if it raises a doubtful plea.

It was ultimately held that while a statement of claim must disclose a cause of action, it does not need to specifically plead that cause of action. In the present case, while the proposed amendments were specifically related to the breach of court orders, they are arguably related to proper causes of action, such as a misappropriation of funds. As such, the Appeal was allowed and the proposed amendments were permitted.