J. Brian Casey

The defendants brought a motion to strike the plaintiffs' statement of claim, which alleged malicious prosecution, negligent investigation, and other torts arising from criminal charges related to a 1992 arson.

The court found the 63-page statement of claim to be prolix, repetitive, argumentative, and replete with evidence, violating the rules of pleading.

The court struck the entire statement of claim but granted the plaintiffs 60 days leave to amend, providing detailed guidance on how to properly plead the causes of action.

The court declined to strike the negligent investigation claims without leave to amend, noting the law in this area is unsettled.

The applicant sought to extend an ex parte Mareva injunction freezing certain shares of a Canadian mining company and associated dividend payments pending enforcement of an international arbitration award.

The award, issued under ICSID Additional Facility Rules, required a foreign state to pay damages for unlawful expropriation.

The moving party argued that shares nominally held by a state‑owned enterprise were beneficially owned by the state and risked being moved beyond the reach of enforcement.

The court found a strong prima facie case that the shares were held for the benefit of the state and that there was a real risk of dissipation or removal of assets.

The Mareva injunction was extended for 90 days and the associated dividend payments ordered held in trust.