› Strike out — scandalous, irrelevant and embarrassing allegations
Practice and procedure
› Pleadings
› Allegations of fraud — requirement for particularity
Practice and procedure
› Pleadings
› Distinction between material facts and evidence
Quick Take
1Allegations of fraud, perjury, criminality and serious misconduct in pleadings must be supported by properly pleaded material facts with sufficient specificity; mere conclusory assertions of such conduct are scandalous within the meaning of r 23.02 and liable to be struck out, particularly where they are not connected to any properly pleaded cause of action.
2Pleadings must identify material facts relevant to the elements of the cause of action advanced and must not function as vehicles for ventilating every grievance arising from a broader factual dispute; allegations concerning separate controversies involving other parties or collateral matters are irrelevant and embarrassing even if the plaintiff genuinely believes them to be true.
3Where a self-represented litigant has already been afforded an opportunity to amend a deficient pleading and the defects are substantive rather than formal, leave to replead may be refused; however, leave should be granted where the pleading is not futile or incapable of cure and the litigant has not had a fair opportunity to articulate the particular contention with precision.
