Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 308
[1164] The evidence presented in this case may have been enough to support the commission of the
tort of misfeasance in public office if the pleadings had been different. However, I am not satisfied
that the Plaintiffs have shown that the precise tort, as pleaded, was committed and this cause of
action is dismissed.
6. Damages
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
(i)
General
[1165] The Plaintiffs seek the recovery of damages under any one of the causes of action that they
have advanced. I have found that the Plaintiffs have successfully established claims in negligence,
negligent misrepresentation and for breach of contract. Although the Amended Statement of Claim
advances a claim in paragraph 1. b) for the recovery of special damages, the Plaintiffs’ response to
undertakings arising from the discovery examination of Mr. Alan Kerr makes it clear that claim is
not being pursued.
[1166] The answer to Undertaking No. 16 is found at page 15 of the “Excerpts From Examination
For Discovery Of The Plaintiffs To Be Read At Trial”, a document that was filed at trial on July 4,
2008 as part of the evidence for the Defendant pursuant to Rule 288. The Reply to the Undertaking
is as follows:
UNDERTAKING NO. 16: Page 0075
PROVIDE A LIST OF THE SPECIAL DAMAGES AND ANY
DOCUMENTS THAT ARE RELATED TO THAT CLAIM
FOR SPECIAL DAMAGES.