Whelton Hiutin LLP lawyer Roshni Khemraj was recently successful on a noteworthy pleadings motion in a case involving a real estate development dispute. The motion concerned whether the proposed amendments constituted the withdrawal of admissions for which leave was required under Rule 51.05 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. The court held that the amendments were not withdrawals of admissions because, among other reasons, the statements in the original statement of claim were not responsive to an allegation made by an opposite party and were therefore not admissions under Rule 51. A copy of the decision, Zanini v. DiPasquale, 2025 ONSC 840, can be found here.