The court considered motions by the plaintiff to amend its statement of claim and by the defendants to strike the statement of claim.
The court found that, except for the claim of unlawful interference with contractual relations, the plaintiff’s amended claim disclosed the material elements of the causes of action pleaded, including breach of confidence, fraudulent misrepresentation, conspiracy, inducing breach of contract, and piercing the corporate veil.
The court dismissed the defendants’ motion to strike, allowed the plaintiff’s motion to amend (except for the unlawful interference claim), and awarded costs to the plaintiff.
