This was an Appeal of a Master’s dismissal of an Application for Summary Judgment. The Appellant argued that the Master erred in the two interpretations of law he proposed in relation to the contractual waiver of rights under the Expropriation Act, RSA 2000 c E-13. Park J. held that in determining whether or not the Master erred in dismissing the Application, the Rules of Court did not require a determination of whether the Master’s interpretations of the law related to the Expropriation Act were correct. It was not for His Lordship to determine whether the Master had made an error of law in the two stated legal issues. Rather, on Appeal, Justice Park was charged with determining whether the Appellant had demonstrated that there was no genuine issue for Trial on the Application presented. The rulings by the Master implicitly and inferentially presented two genuine issues for Trial. As such, Park J. dismissed the Appeal and held that the Master was correct in denying the Application for Summary Judgment.