Dear Mr. Seeyur Atority, Thank you for your recent comment on this article. I have referred to you with an alias to ensure we protect your privacy as legally required. Please understand this is just about laws to which all litigants are entitled. Mr. Addolo, was entitled to have the claim against dismissed on the basis that it disclosed no cause of action due to judicial admissions appearing within the body of the claim. The Court is entitled to the facts provided by the police services who appeared at the scene and who provided a full report. We succeeded on the Addolo file by scheduling a motion on the issue of judicial admissions by the plaintiff in the pleadings. It was set to be a Motion for judgment on an admission of fact in the pleadings, in the examination of an adverse party, or in an answer to a Request to Admit Facts.

23.01 Where Available

(1)  The plaintiff or defendant may, at any time before the action is set down for trial, apply to the court

(a)      for the determination prior to trial, or any questions of law raised by a pleading in the action where the determination of that question may dispose of the action, shorten the trial, or result in a substantial saving of costs,

(b)     to strike out a pleading which does not disclose a reasonable cause of action or defence, or

(c)      for judgment on an admission of fact in the pleadings, in the examination of an adverse party, or in an answer to a Request to Admit Facts;

                  […]

          23.02 Evidence

Except with leave of the court, on applications under Rule 23.01(1), evidence shall not be admitted except

         (a)      a transcript of a relevant examination, and

(b)     affidavits which are necessary to identify a document or prove its execution.

          23.03 Effect of Judgment under this Rule

Where a plaintiff obtains judgment under this rule, such judgment shall not prejudice his right to proceed against the same defendant for other relief, or against any other defendant for the same or other relief, unless the court orders otherwise.

[19]   Rule 23.02 supports the overall intent of the Rules of Court to ensure the determination of matters in a cost effective and fair manner.

[20]   The availability of judgment based on the admissions of a party to an action is a long standing right of a party to a proceeding.  This right is currently available under Rule 23.01(1)(c), as follows:

(1)     The plaintiff or a defendant may, at any time before the action is set down for trial, apply to the court

. . . . . .

(c)      for judgment on an admission of fact in the pleadings, in the examination of an adverse party, or in answer to a Request to Admit Facts;

[21]   Rule 23.01(1)(c) is distinct from Rule 22 which provides for summary judgment at any stage of the proceedings.  Unlike Rule 22, Rule 23.01(1)(c) specifically recognizes the significance of only three stages in the judicial process, which stages are:

         1)      the pleadings,

         2)      the examination of an adverse party, and

         3)      in answer to a Request to Admit Facts.

[22]   In all three of these stages, the parties are seeking to narrow the issues through either the disclosure of facts, the discovery of facts or admissions by the opposing party in an attempt to prevent unnecessary costs and delay.

[23]   In keeping with, and in supporting the purpose of each of these stages of the proceeding, Rule 23.01(1)(c) allows for judgment at the stage in a proceeding when there are admissions of fact that allow for a determination of the dispute.  Counsel for FCC argues that Mr. Dobson made admissions at the Discovery which call for the application of Rule 23.01.

[24]   Counsel for FCC goes onto assert that Mr. Dobson admitted at the Discovery facts that allow for a clear determination of FCC’s claim in its favour.   Further, in my opinion, the admissions allow for the clear determination of Mr. Dobson’s counterclaim in FCC’s favour.

[25]   The motion filed by FCC in this case relates to a request for judgment pursuant to Rule 23.01(1)(c) which recognizes the importance of ensuring proceedings are determined in accordance with the overall intent of the Rules of Court,  namely, in a cost effective and expeditious manner on the merits.

[26]   Parties to a proceeding must put their case forward in accordance with Rules 27.06 (1), 27.07 (1), 27.07 (3) and 27.07 (4) that govern the contents of pleadings.  When read together, these Rules require that a party’s pleadings contain all material facts, the party’s version of the facts and every matter on which the party seeks to rely.

[27]   The pleadings in this matter were completed and the facts and matters pled by Mr. Dobson were tested at the Discovery.  Counsel for FCC asserts that at the Discovery Mr. Dobson made numerous admissions which, in my opinion, would allow for the determination of the proceedings in FCC’s favour pursuant to Rule 23.01 (1)(c).