The Plaintiff sued various parties, including Royal Bank of Canada (“RBC”), seeking damages for deceit and negligence. RBC sought Summary Dismissal of the claim against it on the basis that the Plaintiff was a participant in a fraudulent transaction, and was barred from suing RBC pursuant to the doctrine of ex turpicausa non orituractio(out of fraud, no action arises). Master Prowse noted that Courts have declined to provide summary relief in actions involving complicated and subtle issues of law. Master Prowse also stated that the application of the ex turpicausa and in pari delicto doctrines to situations where there was evidence that an employee or agent of the lender was involved in the fraud was a complicated and nuanced matter that should not be decided summarily.