The appellant appealed a Superior Court decision that held a perpetual right to renew a supply of 5000 horsepower of electricity at a preferential rate remained extant.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the appeal judge failed to give adequate weight to the fact that the original 1928 agreement lapsed in 1987 due to the respondent's failure to give the required renewal notice.
The Court held that subsequent agreements did not revive the perpetual renewal provision, but merely provided a preferential price for a fixed term.
