The appellant challenged a summary judgment determination in a real estate commission dispute, arguing the motion judge improperly exercised the expanded fact-finding powers under revised Rule 20.
The Court of Appeal held that, having regard to the language of the rule and the Supreme Court of Canada's guidance in Hryniak, the motion judge did not err in making the findings necessary to determine the claim.
The central disputed finding, whether the broker showed the property to the purchaser, was characterized as a purely factual issue attracting strong appellate deference.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
