Visionwall International, Inc. v. Litezone Technologies Inc., 2024 FC 1368
Associate Justice Coughlan - 2024-09-03
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
The Plaintiff brings this motion pursuant to Rules 75 and 76 of the Federal Courts Rules, for an Order granting it leave to further amend its Amended Statement of Claim ... The Defendants oppose the motion principally on the basis that the issue sought to be raised by the amendments, that is, spoliation, is now moot given the discovery of complete copies of the “Visionwall Server”. ... I am not persuaded that the interests of justice are served by allowing the amendments. First, the threshold issue does not arise in this case because the parties are agreed that spoliation is not a cause of action.
Decision relates to:
- T-311-20 - VISIONWALL INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. LITEZONE TECHNOLOGIES INC. AND AL