The Appellants appealed a Master’s decision to grant the Respondent Summary Judgment. The parties agreed that the dispute was appropriate for Summary Judgment but disagreed on the correct outcome.

The Court reviewed the principles of Summary Judgment and noted that the standard of review was correctness for Appeals of Master’s decisions because they are heard de novo pursuant to Rule 6.14. The Court noted that Rule 7.3 allows a party to apply for Summary Judgment where there is no defence to a claim or part of it or there is no merit to a claim or part of it.

The Court found that the Master’s Decision granting Summary Judgment to the Respondent was correct considering the facts of the matter. The Appellants had no defence to the Respondent’s claim against them.