As stated in Wells v. Quest Outreach Society and another (No. 2), 2010 BCHRT 80: The rationale behind [Rule 25(4)(b)] is obvious. Once an application to dismiss has been filed, it would generally be unfair to add additional allegations which the respondent applicant would not have addressed in the application, and which would, therefore, necessitate a further application. It is not a question of using the correct form, but of not working an unfairness on respondents. (para. 9)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.