The appellant appealed a motion judge's decision dismissing its breach of contract and warranty claim against an American respondent for lack of jurisdiction.
The motion judge found no real and substantial connection between the respondent and Ontario.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the motion judge failed to properly weigh the factors from Muscutt v. Courelles and conflated a choice of law clause with a choice of jurisdiction clause.
The matter was remitted for re-hearing before a different judge.
