The moving party moved to quash portions of the responding parties' cross-appeals seeking damages for the tort of spoliation, arguing the issue was conclusively determined by a prior Divisional Court order.
The responding parties argued they should be permitted to take advantage of a subsequent change in the law recognizing spoliation as an independent tort.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion to quash, holding that issue estoppel may not apply where there has been a change in the law, and the matter should be determined after full argument in the ordinary course.
