The appellants appealed from an order dismissing their motion to strike the plaintiffs' statement of claim and dismiss the action.
The plaintiffs had previously been found to have breached their fiduciary duty in a prior action and subsequently commenced this action alleging fraud and conspiracy against their former adversaries and their lawyers.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding that the amended statement of claim was an unauthorized abuse of process, the plaintiff lacked capacity to represent the estate, and the action was a collateral attack on the prior judgment barred by res judicata.
The statement of claim was struck without leave to amend and the action was dismissed.
