|
Civil Litigation Dicta - Pleadings - Cause of Action. Total Meter Services Inc. v. GVM Integration
In Total Meter Services Inc. v. GVM Integration (Ont CA, 2025) the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed an appeal in part, here from a finding "for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of confidence".
Here the appeal court considers a 'cause of action' limitation issue that was apparently overlooked in the reasons for decision:[27] The Limitations Act defence issue is reviewable on a correctness standard. The question of whether an amendment raises a new cause of action is a question of law: Polla v. Croatian (Toronto) Credit Union Limited, 2020 ONCA 818, at para. 31, leave to appeal refused, [2021] S.C.C.A. No. 64. ....
....
[29] An amendment to a statement of claim will be refused if it seeks to assert a new cause of action after the expiry of the applicable limitation period: Polla, at para. 33. In this context, “cause of action” refers to “a factual situation the existence of which entitles one person to obtain from the court a remedy against another person”, rather than the legal label attached to a claim (such as “breach of fiduciary duty”): 1100997 Ontario Limited v. North Elgin Centre Inc., 2016 ONCA 848, 409 D.L.R. (4th) 382, at para. 19; Polla, at para. 33; Fehr v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 2024 ONCA 847, at para. 47. In considering whether an amendment raises a new cause of action, the court must consider whether the original pleading already contains the factual matrix – the acts or omissions said to give rise to liability – to support the claim in the proposed amendment, or whether the proposed amendment seeks to put forward additional facts that are necessary to a new and different claim. In conducting this assessment, the court must read the pleadings generously, in favour of the proposed amendment: Polla, at paras. 37-38. . SpaceBridge Inc. v. Baylin Technologies Inc.
In SpaceBridge Inc. v. Baylin Technologies Inc. (Ont CA, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal, this from a "finding that an amendment to the Notice of Application was not statute-barred".
Here the court considers the meaning of 'cause of action', here in an pleadings amendment-limitations context:[31] .... A cause of action, following Lord Diplock’s definition in Letang v. Cooper, [1965] 1 Q.B. 232 (C.A.), at pp. 242-43, is “a factual situation the existence of which entitles one person to obtain from the court a remedy against another person.” As explained in Morden & Perell, The Law of Civil Procedure in Ontario, 5th Ed. (Toronto: LexisNexis Canada, 2024), at para. 2.438:A new cause of action is not asserted if the amendment pleads an alternative claim for relief out of the same facts previously pleaded and no new facts are relied upon, or amount simply to different legal conclusions drawn from the same set of facts, or simply provide particulars of an allegation already pled or additional facts upon which the original right of action is based.
|
