The appellants appealed a summary judgment order in favour of the respondent bank for approximately $275,000 in debt owed by a corporation and guaranteed by the appellants on a joint and several basis.
The appellants' counterclaim was based on allegations that they relied on advice from the bank's small business advisor who failed to warn them of problems in establishing and operating their Second Cup franchise.
The motion judge found the advisor played a limited role, the appellants did not rely exclusively on the advisor, and the appellants had signed documentation limiting the bank's liability.
The motion judge also found no causal connection between any alleged failures by the bank and the failure of the business.
The appeal was dismissed.
