Not exact matches
In Mostar Directional Technologies Inc. v Drill - Tek Corporation et al., 2017 FC 575, on a motion to
strike brought by a defendant, the Prothonotary
struck the
pleading and dismissed the case on the
basis the statement of claim
pleaded no material facts... [more]
Finally, LawPRO successfully argued for the
striking out of a
pleading on the
basis that it disclosed no cause of action against a litigation lawyer.
Those
pleadings that contain no cause of action known at law, and those for which there is no
basis in the context of the Plaintiff's circumstances, must be
struck out without leave to amend.
Neither could the entire action be
struck on the
basis of collateral attack although Justice Simpson did order that the
pleadings be amended so as to remove the attack on the validity of the permits.
The Superior Court of Justice granted the motion to
strike portions of the Plaintiff's
pleadings which allege intentional interference with economic relations, finding that there was no reasonable possibility of success
based on the facts as
pleaded.
The lower court granted the woman's motion to
strike the man's
pleadings on the
basis that the Statement of Claim disclosed no cause of action.