The appellants challenged an order in a bankruptcy proceeding concerning ownership of property and the bona fides of an alleged trust in favour of one respondent.
The Court of Appeal held that the motion judge acted within his discretion under the bankruptcy rules in deciding the merits on a motion rather than directing a trial of an issue, particularly given the appellants' primary position below.
Although conflicting evidence could have supported a different finding, the finding made was open to the motion judge on the totality of the record.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
