The Applicant, 101147420 Saskatchewan Ltd., sought an oppression remedy by way of Summary Judgment. The Respondent, Swift Hotels Group Ltd., contended that this Action could not be determined summarily because the material facts were contested.

Justice Jones found that there were several crucial and material facts which remained uncertain based on the Affidavits before the Court, and that an assessment of credibility was necessary to resolve the conflicting version of events. Crucially, some of the evidence was hearsay. His Lordship stated that, under Rule 13.18, a party seeking to dispose of some or all of the Claim summarily can rely on hearsay evidence only if that evidence would have been admissible at Trial. The Applicant sought to have documents admitted under the vicarious party admission exception; however, they failed to provide the necessary factual foundation to demonstrate that the parties who authored the documents were acting as agents of the Respondent. Because of the conflicting evidence, and the fact that the credibility of the parties was at issue, the matter was not appropriate for Summary Judgment. The Application was dismissed and the matter was directed to Trial.