The defendant appealed a Small Claims Court judgment ordering it to pay the balance of a contract for boiler installation and related work.
The defendant alleged the plaintiff was part of an organized crime conspiracy to sabotage the project and that the trial judge improperly interfered with the presentation of its case.
The Divisional Court found no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's factual findings and dismissed the conspiracy allegations as frivolous.
Although the trial judge's excessive interference in witness examinations amounted to an error in law, the court declined to order a new trial, concluding that no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred given the complete lack of merit to the defence.
