The plaintiffs brought a motion to add several parties, including Watts and Gayton, as defendants in an action arising from a fatal scalding incident in a retirement home bathtub.
Watts and Gayton opposed the motion, arguing the limitation period had expired and they would suffer non-compensable prejudice because the plumbing apparatus was no longer available for inspection.
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to exercise reasonable diligence to discover the identities of the proposed defendants within the limitation period, as they could have obtained this information by requiring timely delivery of the original defendants' statements of defence.
The motion to add Watts and Gayton was dismissed.
