The appellant purchased a wood chipper from the respondent vendor to use with his tractor.
Three years later, the tractor sustained damage while operating the wood chipper.
The appellant sued the vendor and manufacturer for breach of contract, breach of the implied condition of fitness for purpose under the Sale of Goods Act, and negligent misrepresentation, alleging the wood chipper was incompatible with his tractor.
The Small Claims Court dismissed the action, finding the appellant failed to prove the wood chipper caused the damage.
On appeal, the Divisional Court affirmed the trial judge's decision, finding no palpable and overriding error in her reliance on lay opinion evidence or her factual findings.
