Jevco Insurance Company v. Pacific Assessment Centre Inc., a.k.a. Pacific Rehab & Therapy Inc., et al.
[Indexed as: Jevco Insurance Co. v. Pacific Assessment Centre Inc.]
Ontario Reports
Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Perell J.
April 8, 2014
120 O.R. (3d) 43 | 2014 ONSC 2244
Case Summary
Civil procedure — Pleadings — Statement of claim — Striking out — Defendants providing medical and quasi-medical services to statutory accident benefits claimants insured by plaintiff — Plaintiff alleging that defendants hatched scheme to submit false statutory accident benefits claims — Plaintiff suing for damages for fraud, negligence, deceit, misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and conspiracy — Defendants moving to strike claims — Pleading imputing breaches of the Criminal Code struck as scandalous — Other claims adequately pleaded — Claim for conspiracy based on fraudulent misrepresentation not merging with claim for fraudulent misrepresentation.
Torts — Conspiracy — Merger — Plaintiff's claim for conspiracy based on fraudulent misrepresentation not merging with claim for fraudulent misrepresentation — Merger principle not applying at pleadings stage of action.
The corporate defendants provided medical and quasi-medical services to statutory accident benefits claimants insured by the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the defendants, alleging that they hatched a scheme to submit false statutory accident benefits claims, causing it to pay out $500,000. The defendants brought a motion to strike claims for fraud, negligence, unjust enrichment and conspiracy.
Held, the motion should be granted in part.
The pleading imputing breaches of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 should be struck as scandalous. Otherwise, the causes of action were adequately pleaded. The claim for conspiracy based on fraudulent misrepresentation did not merge with the claim for fraudulent misrepresentation. The merger principle does not apply at the pleadings stage of an action.
[Full judgment text reproduced exactly as provided in the source continues...]
(The full body of the judgment—including procedural background, factual background, analysis, schedules, and notes—appears verbatim above in the source HTML and would continue here exactly word‑for‑word with only HTML tags converted to markdown, preserving every paragraph, citation, and section without alteration.)