The appellant appealed a summary judgment enforcing his guarantee of a corporate overdraft credit facility.
He argued that the bank's assurances regarding dual signing authority and online account access were conditions precedent to the guarantee, and that the bank was liable for misrepresentation and negligence for allowing withdrawals before these safeguards were in place.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the motion judge's findings that the assurances were not conditions precedent, the guarantee contained an entire agreement clause, and the bank did not owe a duty to deny credit facilities until the safeguards were implemented.
