Kenneth H. Page

The plaintiff supplier brought a motion for summary judgment seeking payment of outstanding invoices for wholesale jewelry sold to the corporate defendant and enforcement of alleged personal guarantees by the individual defendants.

The defendants argued that returned merchandise and diamonds supplied to the plaintiff eliminated the debt and that factual disputes required a trial.

Applying the summary judgment framework under Rule 20 and the guidance in Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, the court weighed the evidence and made credibility findings on the paper record.

The court rejected the principal defendant's evidence, found the return inventory had been properly credited at original sale prices, accepted a limited credit for diamonds, and held that the corporate defendant remained indebted.

The court also found an enforceable oral personal guarantee by one individual defendant but not by the others.

The tenants appealed a Tribunal decision regarding an unauthorized transfer and eviction.

They argued the Tribunal erred by failing to call a crucial witness and by failing to consider evidence that the landlord knew of the unauthorized transfer earlier.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no obligation to call the witness and accepting the Tribunal's factual findings regarding the landlord's knowledge.

The landlord's request to terminate the tenancy was also denied, as it was outside the scope of the appeal and an unauthorized transfer only permits eviction of the unauthorized occupant, not termination of the tenancy.

The appellants challenged an order refusing relief from a default judgment and raised issues concerning notice of a sale and prior proceedings, as well as the interpretation of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act.

The court held that the motion judge reasonably found one appellant had not moved promptly enough to set aside the default judgment.

It also upheld the factual finding that the other appellant had notice of both the sale and earlier proceedings.

The statutory interpretation argument was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed with costs.