To allow the defendants to amend and now set up this defence would be to allow them to set up a new issue, to which I would have to give the plaintiffs an opportunity to reply, and could only determine after hearing what could be adduced on both sides. A peculiar issue indeed, for the other insurance company did not attempt to avail itself of this trivial error, which apparently in no way affected the risk, and I doubt much if any self-respecting company that intended to continue in business would do so. Even had I the power (McKay, J.'s opinion in Cleary v. Hite (1921), 1921 CanLII 124 (SK QB), 61 D.L.R. 405, 14 S.L.R. 454, is to the contrary) to permit an amendment raising a new issue at this stage and to direct a re-trial, it would not seem to me to be a proper exercise of discretion, or fair to the plaintiffs, to now permit it to be raised.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.