WestlawNext Canada insight Blog

Digest of the Week — Does Courthouse Named After Plaintiff Bias Court?


Alderon Iron Ore Corp. v. Cabana |
2015 CarswellNfld 216 |
Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court (Trial Division)

Civil practice and procedure | Pleadings | Application to strike | When available | Miscellaneous

Defendant made public statements regarding mining interests of corporate plaintiff and personal plaintiff — Corporate plaintiff and personal plaintiff brought action for damages for defamation — Defendant brought application to strike statement of claim, or for stay proceedings, on basis that his right to fair trial had been impaired because government named courthouse in proceeding after personal plaintiff, who was former premier of province — Application dismissed — Procedural difficulty for defendant in relying on Rule 14.24 of Rules of Supreme Court was that grounds upon which he was relying did not meet requirements of rule — Defamation claim pleaded against him was unrelated to collateral act taken by government in naming one of its province's courthouses, which it constructed, maintained, and operated, after former premier who also happened to be party in proceeding taking place there — No application was made with regard to deficiency of pleadings or that claim was not actionable at law — Given scope of rule and jurisprudence interpreting it, there was no basis at this stage in proceeding to support defendant's application to strike or stay under Rule 14.24(1)(c).
© Copyright WestlawNext Canada, Thomson Reuters Canada Limited. All rights reserved.