The plaintiffs brought a motion to strike several paragraphs from the defendant insurer's statement of defence.
The plaintiff pedestrian was struck by a motor vehicle and suffered catastrophic injuries.
The insurer, added as a defendant, pleaded that the collision was an intentional act in self-defence and included allegations about the plaintiff's past criminal record, gang affiliation, and drug involvement.
The court found these allegations to be irrelevant evidence that improperly cast a derogatory light on the plaintiff's character.
The court struck the offending paragraphs under Rule 25.11, concluding that their prejudicial effect outweighed any potential probative value.
