The plaintiffs brought a motion seeking leave to amend their statement of claim to discontinue certain plaintiffs, add a municipal lawyer as a defendant, and deliver a fresh as amended statement of claim alleging malicious prosecution and related torts.
The court held that the proposed addition of the new defendant was barred by the applicable limitation period under the discoverability principle, as the plaintiff had knowledge of the individual’s alleged involvement more than two years before the motion was argued.
The court found that merely delivering a motion before the limitation period expired did not suspend the running of time; the motion must be successfully argued within the limitation period.
As a result, the request to add the proposed defendant and amend the claim to seek damages against him was refused, although leave to discontinue certain plaintiffs was granted.
Costs were awarded against the moving party.
