The vendor and purchaser of certain businesses disagreed on the method of calculating working capital adjustments under an asset purchase agreement.
An accounting firm, KPMG, was directed to calculate the adjustments according to approaches advocated by both parties.
The purchaser sought leave to appeal an order requiring it to make a payment based on KPMG's calculation, arguing KPMG exceeded its jurisdiction.
The Court of Appeal denied leave to appeal, finding that KPMG stayed within its mandate and its determination was final and binding.
