In a recent decision, a US court judge gave Wade Robson and James Safechuck permission to bring their case against Michael Jackson’s companies back up.

The two men say that Jackson s******* them when they were young, and they say that Michael Jackson’s companies had a duty to keep them safe.

Wade Robson and James Safechuck say that the abuse happened when they were living at Jackson’s Neverland ranch in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It’s important to note that Jackson’s lawyers still say he’s innocent.

When these claims were shown in the 2019 documentary “Leaving Neverland,” they got a lot of attention. Jackson’s family was very angry about the film and called it a “public lynching.”

In 2020, a judge in Los Angeles made a very important ruling. He said that James Safechuck couldn’t sue Michael Jackson’s businesses because they didn’t have a duty of care to Safechuck. The same judge ruled the same way in Wade Robson’s case a year later.

But on Friday, an appeals court in California said that these decisions were wrong.

The appeals court’s decision said, “A corporation that facilitates the s**ual abuse of children by one of its employees is not excused from an affirmative duty to protect those children merely because it is solely owned by the perpetrator of the abuse.”

The judge went on to talk about how dangerous it could be to not have this duty: “It would be perverse to find no duty based on the corporate defendant having only one shareholder.”

So, the court threw out the earlier decisions that went in favor of the companies.