The appellant appealed a trial judgment regarding the interpretation of a commercial agreement and alleged misrepresentations about a liquor licence.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's finding that the terms of the liquor licence were generally known to the public and could be learned through due diligence.
The court also upheld the finding of fact that no misrepresentation was made and found no basis for granting relief from forfeiture.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
