The appellants appealed a trial judgment enforcing a loan agreement and personal guarantees, arguing they were entitled to a set-off due to the respondent's breach of related investment and commercial agreements.
The appellants sought to introduce fresh evidence of the respondent's sales to prove a breach of the commercial agreement.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion to introduce fresh evidence, finding it did not meet the Palmer test.
The court also dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's conclusion that the investment agreement had not been orally amended and that the commercial agreement was not a live issue at trial.
