The plaintiffs in a certified class action against Uber sought leave to amend their statement of claim and add a new common issue challenging the validity of Uber's amended arbitration clause and class action waiver.
The court dismissed the motion, finding it to be an abuse of process because the plaintiffs were attempting to re-litigate the validity of the arbitration clause for the fourth time.
Although the court found the newly pleaded cause of action was not statute-barred and satisfied the cause of action criterion, it held that the proposed common issue failed the common issues, preferable procedure, and representative plaintiff criteria because it presupposed an employment relationship that had not yet been determined at the common issues trial.
