The dispute between the parties arose from a purchase and sale agreement for an Esso store in St. Paul, Alberta. Justice Feth heard the Summary Trial. Pursuant to Rule 7.9, after a Summary Trial concludes, the Judge must decide whether to dismiss the Application for Judgment or grant the Application and give Judgment. Justice Feth granted the Application, finding that there was enough evidentiary record to decide the issues of fact and law. His Lordship also concluded that it would not be unjust to decide the issues by Summary Trial, in accordance with Rule 7.9(2)(c).

A question which arose during the Summary Trial was whether the vendor, 956126 Alberta Ltd., had engaged in deceit or fraudulent misrepresentation. The purchaser argued that the vendor had committed the tort of deceit and as a result asked the Court to rescind the purchase and sale agreement. Fraudulent misrepresentation was not pleaded in the Statement of Claim. Justice Feth considered the pleadings in light of Rule 13.6(2), which requires a pleading to state facts on which the parties rely, but noted there was no requirement to plead specific words. Although fraudulent misrepresentation was not specifically pleaded in the Statement of Claim, the material facts for the claim were found. Although the claim was properly before His Lordship, he found that there was no fraudulent misrepresentation.