The plaintiff sought leave to amend his statement of claim to include a claim for human rights damages, which he had initially pursued before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO).
The HRTO application was dismissed after the defendant successfully argued that all issues, including human rights allegations, should be heard in the civil action.
The defendant subsequently opposed the amendment in the civil action, citing abuse of process and the expiry of the limitation period.
The court granted the plaintiff's motion, finding it would be unfair to deny the amendment given the defendant's prior position.
The court held that the amendment did not introduce a new cause of action but rather sought a different remedy arising from the same factual matrix originally pleaded, thus not being statute-barred.
Costs were awarded to the plaintiff.
