The plaintiffs moved under Rule 26.01 to amend their statement of claim arising from alleged negligent construction damage to a semi-detached home by adding allegations that the negligence caused the spouses' separation and one plaintiff's suicide, together with a derivative claim under s. 61 of the Family Law Act.
The court held that on a pleadings amendment motion the inquiry is whether the proposed amendment is tenable in law, applying the same plain and obvious standard used on a motion to strike.
The proposed pleading failed to allege a recognized psychiatric injury of sufficient seriousness and duration, instead relying on pleaded upset, distress, and stress, which are not compensable mental illness.
The court further held that suicide was not reasonably foreseeable on the pleaded facts, particularly absent any pleaded vulnerability or direct relational duty akin to doctor-patient or teacher-student cases.
Leave to amend was refused.
