Can a judge accept the amendments dealt with in paras 18.5 and 22.4 of the case as a whole?

We feel that as the trial judge accepted the amendments dealt with in paras. 18.5 and 22, he could not logically conclude that paras. 18.1 to 18.4 of the case, as worded, were irrelevant. It is true that the action has gone on for 13 years, the pleadings have given rise to many amendments on either side and there have been several days of examination for discovery. However, the harm sustained by the respondents, if any, could be compensated for by costs (The Queen v. Canderel Ltée, 1993 CanLII 2990 (FCA), [1994] 1 F.C. 3).