The appellant appealed a trial judgment finding it breached an exclusive supplier agreement and awarding the respondent nearly $5 million in lost profits.
The appellant argued the trial judge erred by failing to imply a term requiring customer consent, finding a breach regarding a specific contract, and excluding certain evidence on damages.
The respondent cross-appealed, seeking an additional $1 million in damages, arguing the trial judge arbitrarily increased the calculation of incremental overhead expenses.
The Court of Appeal dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeal, finding the trial judge's factual findings were supported by the evidence and his legal conclusions were correct.
