Legal Blog

Third Party Action Leave

Tadiem v. Allied Properties Management LP 2019 Ont SCJ

The defendant by counterclaim wanted to add a third party to that counterclaim, but, because of rule 29.02 and the fact that the third party claim had not been issued within 10 days after the reply, the defendant by counterclaim needed to seek leave of the court. The plaintiff by counterclaim resisted the motion, alleging that the proposed third party claim did not disclose a reasonable cause of action. The Master and the judge on appeal noted that the third party claim did provide a proper cause of action, both in contract and in tort. The judge noted that, in deciding whether to grant leave, the court could consider whether the proposed third party claim was tenable, but that the threshold for establishing that was very low and akin to the test applicable in motions to strike. The third party claim was allowed.

Written by Jonathan Speigel, the founding partner of Speigel Nichols Fox LLP, leads the litigation and construction practices.