The appellant appealed a Master's decision dismissing his motion to vary an order under Rule 59.06 following a construction lien trial.
The Divisional Court found that the Master made no error of law, did not exercise his discretion improperly, and made no palpable or overriding error.
The Master correctly concluded there was no fresh evidence, no accidental slip regarding the Scott Schedules, and no enforceable fixed-price contract between the parties.
The appeal was dismissed with costs awarded to the respondents.
