The Court referred to Manufacturers Life Insurance Co v Executive Centre at Manulife Place Inc, 2011 ABQB 189, in which it was determined that the test for Summary Judgment is the same as under the “old” Rules. Kent J. proceeded to draw from Tottrup v Clearwater No 99 (Municipal District), 2006 ABCA 380, where an expression of the rule for Summary Judgment is given. Her Ladyship made reference to an Ontario Court of Appeal decision for the proposition that Summary Judgment is inappropriate to decide a significant question of law involving the definitive interpretation of a legislative provision. The Court further noted that Summary Judgment is denied where a determination of the issue requires a careful analysis of a complex legal test. Kent J. granted the Application, noting that: (1) no findings of fact were made so there could be no inconsistent factual findings, and (2) the interpretation of the legislative provision in question would be the same at Trial.