The defendant sought leave to appeal a decision striking his jury notice.
The underlying dispute involved whether Minutes of Settlement should be enforced or set aside due to fraud, undue influence, and unconscionability.
The court found that the plaintiff's claim was essentially for specific performance and the defendant's counterclaim for rescission, both of which fall under s. 108(2) of the Courts of Justice Act, precluding a jury trial.
The court held that the motion judge's decision was not open to very serious debate and there were no conflicting decisions.
Leave to appeal was dismissed with costs awarded to the plaintiff.
