The plaintiff brought a motion under Rule 26 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to amend its Statement of Claim to add a claim for negligence in the design and manufacture of tunnel boring equipment.
The defendant opposed the motion, arguing the limitation period had expired, the amendment raised a new cause of action, and the claim for pure economic loss was untenable in law.
The court granted the motion, finding that the proposed amendment relied on facts already substantially pleaded and did not constitute a new cause of action.
The court also held that the tenability of the economic loss claim and the effect of the Sale Agreement should be determined on a full evidentiary record, not on a pleadings motion.
