The appellant sought to appeal the dismissal of his summary judgment motion regarding fraudulent conveyances.
The motion judge had dismissed the motion on the basis that the underlying debt was discharged in bankruptcy and the appellant had failed to follow the correct procedure under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.
The Court of Appeal quashed the appeal, finding that the motion judge's order was interlocutory because it did not determine the substantive rights of the parties.
Therefore, the appeal properly lies to the Divisional Court with leave.
