In a dispute involving contractual interpretation, the Respondent, Baim, was granted partial Summary Judgment by a Master in Chambers. The Court of Queen’s Bench upheld the Master’s Decision on Appeal. The Appellants appealed.

The Court of Appeal confirmed that, pursuant to Rule 7.3(1)(a) a party may apply for Summary Judgment of all or part of a Claim on the basis that there is was defence; further, “[p]artial summary judgment is expressly contemplated by the words of rule 7.3”. The Court of Appeal observed that, in this case, partial Summary Judgment could be granted so long as the issue of contractual interpretation could be decided discretely and fairly.

Finding that the contractual matter at issue was discrete, the lower Court’s interpretation of the contract was reasonable. Contrary to the Appellants’ position there were no triable issues to be determined before interpreting the contract. The Court of Appeal dismissed the Appeal.