The defendants brought a motion under Rules 21 and 25.11 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to strike out the plaintiffs' Amended Statement of Claim, arguing it failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action and lacked sufficient detail.
The plaintiffs' claim alleged breach of contract, oppression, breach of good faith, misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment arising from a joint venture departure agreement and an alleged sham termination of a management contract.
The court dismissed the motion, finding that the claims were pleaded with sufficient particularity and it was not plain and obvious that they would fail.