The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court decision regarding the seizure of a leased vehicle.
The respondent had signed a personal guarantee for a corporate automobile lease covering multiple vehicles.
The trial judge found in favour of the respondent, imposing an implied obligation on the appellant to provide notice before seizing the vehicle.
On appeal, the Divisional Court held that the trial judge erred by ignoring the clear and unambiguous terms of the guarantee and considering the respondent's subjective intentions.
The appeal was granted and the trial decision was overturned.
