Issue:
The plaintiffs sought to amend their claim to allege that CBRE Limited acted deceitfully and breached ethical duties, intending to secure a declaratory judgment.

Court’s Analysis & Decision:

1. Proposed Amendment to Plead Deceit:

   • The plaintiffs aimed to claim deceit, arguing that CBRE’s agent, Tony Gill, acted unethically by assisting Fan Zhou in bypassing the plaintiffs’ representation agreement, thus denying them a commission.
   • Legal Standard for Deceit: The court emphasized that deceit requires specific allegations, including intentional false statements, reliance, and resultant loss.

2. Insufficient Particularity:

   • The plaintiffs failed to provide detailed allegations, such as how CBRE owed a duty to disclose information, how it breached this duty, and the damages incurred.
   • Given the lack of specificity and details required under Ontario’s Rule 25.06(8) for claims involving deceit, the court denied the amendment request.

3. Costs Awarded:

   • CBRE, as the successful party, was awarded $7,000 in costs, slightly less than its full claim, reflecting a reasonable expectation for the motion’s complexity.

Conclusion:
The motion to amend the claim against CBRE was dismissed due to insufficiently detailed allegations for deceit. The court highlighted the importance of particularity in such serious claims.