The appellant appealed a trial judgment regarding a breach of contract for machining steel pieces.
The appellant argued the trial judge erred in failing to award damages for a scrapped forging and in apportioning liability for extra honing based on the contract price between the parties rather than the reduced price negotiated with the customer.
The Divisional Court dismissed the first ground, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's conclusion that the damages evidence was insufficient.
However, the court allowed the appeal in part on the second ground, holding that the trial judge misapplied the law by not basing the apportionment on the appellant's loss of profits from its customer.
The respondent's cross-appeal on factual findings and costs was dismissed.
