The appellant, an Ontario-based multi-national enterprise, appealed a motion judge's finding that Ontario law governed its contract with the respondent, an Alberta corporation.
The contract, which lacked a choice of law clause, was for the design and sale of a fryer and oven system that allegedly caused a fire at the respondent's plant.
The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's application of the 'closest and most real connection' test, agreeing that the nature, subject matter, and place of performance of the contract favoured Ontario, as the system was designed and its components ordered there.
The appeal was dismissed.
