David A. MacKenzie

The appellants appealed an order striking out their statement of defence and crossclaim and granting judgment against them for $49,628.11.

They argued the motion judge failed to give reasons for the decision.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the record clearly disclosed the basis for the order: the appellants failed to answer undertakings despite multiple opportunities and court orders, and failed to respond to the motion to strike.

The evidentiary record supported the judgment amount.

Following a trial and related injunction proceedings, the successful party sought recovery of its legal costs.

The court reviewed the cost submissions of both parties and determined that the successful party was entitled to costs on a partial indemnity basis.

The court found no reason to depart from the amounts claimed for trial preparation, attendance, and injunction-related work.

Costs were fixed in a specified amount payable by the opposing party.

The appellant challenged a priority ruling involving two motor vehicles, arguing its lease agreements were true leases and did not require registration under the Personal Property Security Act.

The Court of Appeal held that the agreements were open-end leases under which the lessee remained liable for any deficiency on disposition and received any surplus, making the arrangements financing agreements in substance.

Because the transactions created security interests under s. 2 of the Act, registration was required to preserve priority.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.