|
Fraud - Civil. Natario v. RBC Insurance Company of Canada
In Natario v. RBC Insurance Company of Canada (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed a motion to quash an appeal on final versus interlocutory 'appeal routes' grounds.
Here the court considers civil fraud, here as a pleadings amendment issue:[18] In this case, the motion judge denied the insurers leave to amend the pleadings to plead civil fraud.
[19] Civil fraud differs from the defences already pleaded by the insurers, including defences based on specific provisions of the policy and common law breach of the duty of good faith.
[20] The Rules require that affirmative defences be specifically pleaded to avoid surprise at trial. The particulars should set out how the elements of fraud are met and the same facts may support different forms of relief depending on the defence pleaded: Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 25.06(8); A.A. v. Macri, 2010 ONCA 99, at para. 37; Teefy Developments (Bathurst Glen) Limited v. Sun, 2021 ONCA 870, at para. 14. Civil fraud requires proof of a false representation, knowledge of the falsehood or recklessness, reliance on the representation, and a resulting loss: Bruno Appliance and Furniture, Inc. v. Hryniak, 2014 SCC 8, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 126, at paras. 17-21.
[21] The moving party concedes that civil fraud is a distinct defence and that the motion judge denied the insurers the right to assert civil fraud.
[22] The order refusing the proposed amendment therefore forecloses a new substantive defence. Accordingly, an appeal lies as of right to this court: Courts of Justice Act, s. 6(1)(b).
|
