The plaintiff factor moved for summary judgment against the defendants on personal guarantees they signed for a corporate borrower's debts.
The defendants argued they subjectively understood the guarantees only applied to the first factoring draw, and later claimed the plaintiff's president orally confirmed this limitation.
Applying the Hryniak framework, the court found no genuine issue requiring a trial, holding that subjective intentions cannot contradict the plain wording of a continuing guarantee and utilizing enhanced fact-finding powers to reject the defendants' late-raised oral evidence as incredible.
Summary judgment was granted to the plaintiff.
