P. Roderick Brooks

The appellants appealed an order granting the respondent bank's motion for summary judgment based on minutes of settlement.

The appellants argued the motion judge misapplied the test for summary judgment, improperly dismissed their claim that the minutes were altered without permission, and made implicit factual findings on conflicting evidence.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no genuine issue for trial, as the documentation clearly showed the appellants agreed to a $100,000 settlement on a $125,000 loan, and bald assertions in a self-serving affidavit did not create a triable issue.

The appellants appealed a summary judgment granted in favour of the respondent bank on its claim and dismissing the appellants' counterclaim.

The appellants argued the bank breached a duty by misrepresenting its willingness to review existing loans and advance additional funds for a subdivision.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no factual foundation or evidence of any such misrepresentation, and upheld the motion judge's conclusion that there was no genuine issue for trial.