The defendants moved to strike the plaintiffs' statement of claim arising from the sale of a gas station business.
The court found the claim was irregular as it failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action against one defendant, lacked required particulars for allegations of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty, and created a multiplicity of proceedings by raising issues that should have been addressed in an existing parallel action between the parties.
The motion was granted and the statement of claim was struck in its entirety.
