HORNER v DAVIDSON

The Defendant wife applied for Summary Dismissal of an Action stemming from a matrimonial dispute. The main issue in the Action was whether one estranged spouse could sue the other for using an Emergency Protection Order to gain exclusive possession of the matrimonial home. The Plaintiff husband was self-represented and his Statement of Claim did not expressly use the word “defamation” or “abuse of process”. Master Schlosser noted that Rule 13.7(f) requires particulars of defamation to be pleaded. Rule 13.6 does not require that abuse of process be specifically pleaded. Master Schlosser stated that, even if the form of the Pleadings was defective, the Defendant’s counsel was under no illusions about the basis of the Plaintiff’s Claim. The outcome of the case was not sufficiently certain that the Action should be summarily dismissed. In the result, Master Schlosser dismissed the Defendant’s Application for Summary Judgment.