The appellants appealed a motion judge's decision refusing to strike the respondent's claim under Rule 21.
The respondent had pleaded the common employer doctrine against a group of corporate defendants and their operator.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the motion judge that the application of the common employer doctrine to operators of a group of common employers is a developing area of law, and it was not plain and obvious the claim would fail.
The court also found the claim was pleaded with sufficient particularity.
