How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Legal Ease Your Own Question
Legal Ease
Legal Ease, Lawyer
Category: Canada Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 98048
Experience:  I am a practicing lawyer and have also been an online professional for 5 years.
10263656
Type Your Canada Business Law Question Here...
Legal Ease is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I have a general question about a reply to a response to

Customer Question

I have a general question about a reply to a response to civil claim, in British Columbia. In what instances does a person file a reply?
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Canada Business Law
Expert:  Legal Ease replied 1 year ago.

There is rarely a time where a reply to a defence is needed. If you feel that something important was left out of your claim that you want before the court in terms of the pleadings because of what you've seen in the response you can then add that.

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
The defendant has plead that the claim should be struck under the Limitation Act that came into force in June of 2013. I am wondering whether I need to reply to this. My argument is that the claim is governed by the previous Limitation Act, and in this case the claim would be within the limitation period. I would not plead additional facts in the reply, just reply to their affirmative defense in regard to the law.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
If it would not be required to file a reply to their allegation that the current Limitation Act applies, when it is my argument that the previous Limitation Act would apply, then I would not do so. I read somewhere that if an affirmative defense of limitation is raised that the plaintiff must reply, though I am not sure whether this means even if additional facts would not be added, I should still reply.
Expert:  Legal Ease replied 1 year ago.

In your claim did you already state the the previous Limitation Act applies?

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
No, I did not refer to any limitation act at all. The facts as pleaded would support the previous limitation act being applied. Since the defendant raised the current limitation act as an affirmative defense, I am not sure whether I need to reply or not, if I would not be adding additional facts. I would just be denying that the current limitation act applies and stating that the previous act applies.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
The Supreme Court Civil Rules state that a party must not file a reply that merely is a joiner of an issue.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
joinder of an issue.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
this matter is in British Columbia.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Court Rule 3-6(4) states "a reply that is a simple joinder of issue must not be filed or served".I am not familiar with whether replying to a conclusion of law would be a "joinder of issue". If it is a matter of interpretation of the law, would a person need to reply?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Court Rule 3-6 (3) states: "If no reply to a response to civil claim is served, a joinder of issue on that response to civil claim is implied."
Expert:  Legal Ease replied 1 year ago.

There is no reason for you to put in a reply in this case.

Related Canada Business Law Questions