The appellant appealed a summary judgment award requiring it to pay outstanding invoices for temporary staffing services.
The appellant sought to rely on a set-off defence based on fraudulent invoices submitted by the respondent's employees for workers who did not actually work at the appellant's plant.
The Court of Appeal upheld the summary judgment, finding that legal set-off was unavailable because the claim was for unliquidated damages, and equitable set-off was unavailable because the appellant bore responsibility for the fraud through its own representative's actions and was in the best position to prevent it.
