The plaintiffs, purchasers of pre-construction homes, sued the developer, its directors, its lender, and the subsequent purchaser of the development after their agreements of purchase and sale were terminated and their deposits retained.
Several groups of defendants brought motions to strike the statements of claim under Rule 21.01(1)(b) and Rule 25.11.
The court found the pleadings to be deficient, confusing, and lacking material facts.
Many claims, including conspiracy, interference with economic relations, and inducing breach of contract, were struck with leave to amend.
Claims for unjust enrichment and claims against the individual directors of the subsequent purchaser were struck without leave to amend.
Claims against the former directors of the developer under the Assignments and Preferences Act and for oppression were allowed to proceed.
