SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA
Citation: Parsons v. S. Cunard & Company Ltd., 2011 NSSC 191
Date: 20110405
Docket: Hfx No. 281593
Registry: Halifax
Between:
Mary Lou Parsons, Kenneth Parsons and Nicole Parsons
Plaintiffs
v.
S. Cunard & Company Limited, a body corporate, and Julie Lyons
Defendants
LIBRARY HEADING
Judge: The Honourable Justice C. Richard Coughlan
Heard: March 29, 2011 (in Chambers), in Halifax, Nova Scotia
Decision: April 5, 2011 (Orally)
Written Release
of Decision: May 19, 2011
Subject: Practice - Amendment of Pleadings - After expiry of Limitation Period
Practice - Setting aside Order issued by Deputy Prothonotary
Summary: The plaintiffs commenced action against the defendants. Defences were filed. The plaintiffs and one defendant settled the plaintiffs’ claim against that defendant, and obtained an order issued by a deputy prothonotary dismissing the plaintiffs’ claim against that defendant without notice to the second defendant. The plaintiffs moved to amend the statement of claim. The second defendant, upon receiving notice of the dismissal order, moved to set aside the dismissal order and amend her defence to include a cross-claim against the first defendant.
Issue: 1) Should the plaintiffs be allowed to amend their statement of claim?
2) Should the dismissal order be set aside and the second defendant allowed to amend her defence?
Result: The amendment of the statement of claim was allowed as the factors in Civil Procedure Rule 83.11 were present, that is, the material facts supporting the cause were pleaded and the amendment merely identifies or better describes the cause.
The dismissal order was set aside as the deputy prothonotary did not have authority to issue the order - not all persons entitled to notice had notice of the order. The second defendant was granted leave to amend her defence to include a counter-claim against the first defendant.
THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION. QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.