Can a statement of claim be struck where there is evidence of correspondence and negotiations between the parties?

In Anderson v. Cunningham 29 C.P.C. (3rd) 332 Forsyth J. granted an order striking the statement of claim where there was evidence of greater correspondence and negotiations between the parties, including an exchange of settlement proposals.

The more recent Court of Appeal decision of Wasyleshko v. Chamakese Docket #97030382 (1999) A.J. 77 is factually most similar to this present case. In that case the plaintiffs counsel had been in contact with the insurance adjusters prior to the issuance of the statement of claim and after its issuance had forwarded a copy of the statement of claim to the insurers. The court held that at paragraph 11: We accept for the purpose of argument, and without deciding the issue, that the adjusters representations could have formed the basis for a standstill agreement waiving or suspending the requirement for service of the statement of claim while settlement negotiations continued. The issue was stated at paragraph 12: The relevant inquiry is whether the exchange of correspondence and the conduct of the parties evidences the acceptance and reliance necessary to show a standstill arrangement in respect of procedural matters pending settlement discussions.