The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment arising from a solicitor’s breach of undertaking to repay loans advanced to a client from settlement proceeds of litigation.
The solicitor conceded breach but argued liability was limited to the $40,000 expressly covered by written undertakings.
The court held that additional losses were a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the breach because the lender relied on the undertaking and continued advancing funds while unaware of settlements.
Documentary evidence including cheques and a promissory note constituted sufficient corroboration under s. 13 of the Evidence Act.
Summary judgment was granted for $100,000 plus pre‑judgment interest.
