Canada: Court Of Appeal Protects Professionals By Invigorating Rule Allowing Pleadings To Be Struck

On April 29, 2014, the Alberta Court of Appeal released an important decision in the case of O'Connor Associates Environmental Inc. v. MEC OP LLC.

An appeal was brought by O'Connor Associates Environmental Inc. (O'Connor) and Niven Fischer Energy Services Inc. (Niven) (collectively the Third Parties) who had been third-partied into the litigation by the defendants, MEC OP LLC, MEC OP Transaction I ULC and Merit Energy Company LLC (collectively the Defendants).

In the main action, the plaintiff, NEP Canada ULC (NEP or the Plaintiff) sued the Defendants alleging that the Defendants had engaged in deceit, misrepresentation, and other related acts in the context of a sale by the Defendants of significant oil and gas assets to the Plaintiff. The claim was also made for breach of the Purchase and Sale Agreement that governed the sale of the assets. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendants failed to disclose certain material facts about the assets and that the resulting damage amounted to approximately C$70 million.

The third parties, O'Connor and Niven, were contractual due diligence providers to the Plaintiff. They were retained by the Plaintiff to give various advice relating to the lands and environmental issues surrounding the lands. They had no contractual relationship with the Defendants.

The Defendants advanced their claim against the third parties initially on the basis of a new Rule of Court, Rule 3.44(c). This rule, which is similar in language to Rule 29.01(c) of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure, allows a party to be brought into an action as a third party if that party "should be bound by a decision about an issue between the plaintiff and the defendant." After an application was brought by the Third Parties to strike the pleadings, the Defendants then applied to amend its third-party claim to add paragraphs that asserted that an independent duty was owed by the Third Parties to the Defendants. The new paragraphs asserted that the Third Parties owed a duty to the Defendants because "they failed to adequately disclose or communicate information" to the Plaintiff.

The Defendants were successful at first instance in front of the case management judge in amending their pleadings and in defeating the application to have the third-party claims struck. The amendment and the pleading was upheld in part on the basis of an earlier decision of the Court of Appeal, Arcelormittal Tubular Products Roman S.A. v. Fluor Canada Ltd., in which the court had recognized "an arguable independent duty in negligence, despite the absence of a contractual relationship, between a defendant and third party based on their relationship as actors in the same factual milieu." The Third Parties appealed.

Three weeks after argument was heard, the Court of Appeal rendered its decision and determined that there was no basis for a claim against the Third Parties. The Court of Appeal refused to allow the amendments to the pleading and refused to allow the Third Party Claim to survive based on Rule 3.44(c).

In reaching its decision, the Court of Appeal provided important guidance on a number of points as outlined below.


The Court of Appeal heard the argument after the release of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Hryniak v. Mauldin. In the Hryniak case, the Supreme Court of Canada called for a new approach to summary judgment and "a culture shift . . . in order to create an environment promoting timely and affordable access to the civil justice system . . . moving the emphasis away from the conventional trial in favour of proportional procedures tailored to the needs of the particular case." The Court of Appeal stated that that approach articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada should also be applied to an analysis of whether a pleading should be struck: "Striking pleadings that have no reasonable prospects of success is consistent with this new culture" (paragraph 14).

The court then restated and clarified the test for striking pleadings that had been articulated in the Arcelormittal Tubular case. The court said, "In determining whether a novel claim has a reasonable prospect of success, many factors must be examined. The clarity of the factual pleadings is important. The existence of case law discussing the same or similar causes of action is relevant. As noted in Imperial Tobacco, the Courts must be careful not to inhibit the development of the common law by applying too strict a test to novel claims. However, the Courts must resist the temptation to send every case to trial, even if some legal analysis is needed to determine if the claim has reasonable prospect of success."

The court then applied this restated test for striking pleadings to the facts at hand.


The court determined that on the facts, the amendments should not be allowed as the pleading had no reasonable chance of success. The court considered particularly whether third-party consultants, without a contractual relationship with a defendant, owed potential duties in tort to the defendant. Importantly, and helpfully, from the perspective of all consultants, whether lawyers or other professionals, the court strongly rejected the notion that a duty of care lies between a third-party consultant and the opposite party to that retaining the third-party consultant in circumstances such as this. The court noted that the third parties were selected, retained, instructed and paid by the Plaintiff. Their proximity was to the Plaintiff and not the Defendants. The Defendants could not have had any reasonable expectation that the Third Parties were protecting its interests. Indeed, the court says that it would have been unreasonable for that presumption to arise and unreasonable for the Defendants, as vendors in a sale situation, to rely on what the Third Parties were doing. The court also noted that a professional adviser will typically be acting under a contract with its principal. That contract may well limit the liability of those advisers even to the principal itself.

Further, the court said that policy considerations also prevent the recognition of a duty to care in circumstances such as this. In cases involving solicitors or professionals, the court noted that it would be impossible for those professionals to act if they owed duties to the opposite party. The court cited with approval the statement in the case of Kamahap Enterprises Ltd. v. Chu's Central Market Ltd. (1989) that "had they such a duty, they could not safely care also for the interest of their principal, which is, of course, their real function." As a result, the court found there was no reasonable prospect of establishing a duty of care and that the amendments should be struck. That conclusion, delivered as strongly as it is, is salutary to all parties involved in offering professional advice in a purchase and sale context.

RULE 3.44(C)

Finally, the court provided helpful commentary on the meaning and interpretation of Rule 3.44 (c). The rule is a new one to the Rules of Court and appears to expand, potentially greatly, the ambit of allowable third-party claims. The court was careful to suggest that it was not providing principles of general guidance in respect of the interpretation of Rule 3.44(c). At the same time, however, the court provided some clarity through its application of Rule 3.44(c) to these facts.

The court stated that the new Rule 3.44(c) permits a "wider range of third party claims." The rule is now "another potential form of joinder." The court also said, however, that "It does not mean, however, that any potential issue or claim between the parties and non-parties should be joined together using the third party process. At a minimum, the third party notice must disclose a legally recognized claim by either the plaintiff or the defendant against the third party. The complexity, expense, and time demands of an action will vary directly depending on the number of parties and causes of action. At some point issues of proportionality and efficiency dictate that collateral claims be tried on their own. Prevention of multiplicity of proceedings is desirable, but so too is allowing the economic and timely advancement of the original action" (paragraph 26).

The court then determined that Rule 3.44(c) should not be applied in this instance to allow the third-party claim for the following reasons:

  • The prospect of inconsistent findings in this case was largely theoretical. There was no outstanding claim between the Plaintiff and the Third Party advisers. Further, there may not be such a claim depending upon the specific terms of the contract between the Plaintiff and the Third Parties. There might not be any inconsistencies at all.
  • There will be situations where third-party proceedings will always be inappropriate. One is where the third-party claim is, in substance, a defence to the plaintiff's claim. Here, the Defendants had already defended the Plaintiff's action on the basis that the Plaintiff was in receipt of third-party advice and had responsibility to conduct proper due diligence. There was no need for the Third Parties to be involved.
  • Further, third-party proceedings will be inappropriate when the third parties are agents of the plaintiff and the plaintiff is responsible for their conduct. That was the case here.
  • Finally, the various causes of action alleged – deceit, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and tort – did not require third-party involvement. Any deficiencies in the conduct of the Third Parties could be laid at the feed of the Plaintiff and constitute defences to the various causes of action brought by the Plaintiff. There was no need for the Third Parties to be involved.


In the result, as indicated above, the action was struck against the Third Parties. New vigour was attached to the rule allowing pleadings to be struck. The Court of Appeal has indicated that the rules allowing pleadings to be struck on the basis of no cause of action should be given real effect, particularly as a result of the guidance of the Supreme Court of Canada in Hryniak. The Court of Appeal also clarified that a claim will not survive merely because it is novel – there must be substance. Professionals and consultants do not owe duties to the opposite party in a purchase and sale transaction.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
15 Nov 2018, Other, Toronto, Canada

Proactive anticorruption compliance programs, risk assessments and detailed due diligence practices can make the world of difference when engaging in global business transactions.

15 Nov 2018, Webinar, Toronto, Canada

Join us for a live webcast with partners from our Employment & Labour and Litigation & Dispute Resolution groups as they discuss employment-related challenges and considerations surrounding the recent legalization of recreational cannabis in Canada.

15 Nov 2018, Webinar, Toronto, Canada

Join us for a live webcast with partners from our Employment & Labour and Litigation & Dispute Resolution groups as they discuss employment-related challenges and considerations surrounding the recent legalization of recreational cannabis in Canada.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions