“You’re not even saying I did anything wrong!”  

Ps brought claims against various Ds for corporate oppression and breach of directors duties.  The second defendant, D2 (a former spouse of D1), was mentioned only twice in the Ps’ evidence; once by mistake: [3] 

 The Ps’ proposed Statement of Claim repeated the mistaken reference: [6]  

The Ps asserted 2D was involved in the former spouse’s improper conduct or received profits or benefits as a result of it: [7], [9]  

2D said the evidence was on, it did not support any claim against 2D, and so the claim against 2D should be dismissed immediately or “summarily”: [10]  

The Court considered it could not conclude the Ps had no possibility of success against 2D, [17], but was satisfied the existing Statement of Claim did not properly plead a case against 2D: [17], [18]  

Despite the fact  leave to replead was granted, 2D enjoyed a “substantial success” and so a costs order was made in 2D’s favour: [23]