Where it is uncertain whether a limitation period has expired and the question cannot be fairly determined at the interlocutory stage, the court should assess whether new causes of action arise out of the same or substantially the same facts under UCPR r 376(4)(b). If they do, amendments should be allowed without condition to preserve the beneficial operation of r 376. If they do not, amendments may be allowed on terms that they take effect from a specified date. Amendments introducing allegations tantamount to fraud (such as knowledge of misleading conduct or reckless indifference) do not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as existing claims based on misleading and deceptive conduct.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.