The moving party sought leave to amend its pleading in a construction deficiencies action arising from a condominium conversion project, including adding a structural engineering firm as a new defendant and pleading economic loss based on dangerous defects.
The court held that, even assuming a Bird-type pure economic loss claim was available, the proposed claim against the new defendant was discoverable at least by the time the original statement of claim was issued, and was therefore barred by the two-year limitation period under the Limitations Act, 2002.
The later expert report did not postpone discoverability, as certainty and a comprehensive understanding of the claim were not required.
Leave to add the proposed defendant was refused, while other unopposed or consented amendments were allowed.
