The plaintiff brought a motion under Rule 34.15 of the Rules of Civil Procedure seeking an order compelling the defendant contractor to answer certain undertakings and refused questions arising from an examination for discovery.
The disputed questions concerned information about bonuses allegedly paid by the project owner to the contractor for work performed by the plaintiff subcontractor.
The defendant argued that the bonus issue constituted a new claim improperly raised in the plaintiff’s reply rather than the statement of claim and therefore refused to answer discovery questions on the topic.
The court held that the bonus issue formed part of the existing pleadings and that any challenge to the adequacy of the pleading should have been brought by motion to strike or amend.
The questions were relevant to the issues as pleaded and were ordered to be answered within a specified time.
