The appellants, a landlord and its beneficial owner, appealed a motion judge's decision that a subrogated action by the landlord's insurer against the tenant for fire damage was barred by the commercial lease.
The motion judge had found that the tenant's contribution to the landlord's fire insurance precluded such an action, despite an indemnity provision, as the lease did not explicitly state otherwise.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no errors in the motion judge's interpretation of the lease, his holistic reading of its terms, or his consideration of relevant case law.
