An automobile insurer commenced an action alleging that medical assessment centres and their principals conspired to submit fraudulent statutory accident benefits claims and supporting documentation, causing the insurer to pay over $500,000 in benefits.
The defendants moved under rule 21.01(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure to strike the fresh as amended statement of claim for failure to disclose a reasonable cause of action.
The court held that the claims for fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, negligence, unjust enrichment, and conspiracy were adequately pleaded and provided sufficient particulars.
The court rejected the defendants’ argument that the conspiracy claim merged with the tort claims at the pleadings stage, holding that the merger doctrine should not be used to strike a conspiracy claim before trial.
The only portion struck was the allegation that the defendants breached the Criminal Code, which was held to be scandalous in a civil pleading.
