The Applicant lessors sought Summary Judgment with respect to a petroleum and natural gas lease (the “Lease”) entered into with the Respondents (“Sword”). The Applicants sought Summary Judgment on the basis that the facts were not in dispute, and Sword refused or failed to comply with its contractual obligation under the Lease to, within 30 days, remedy the breach alleged by the lessors, or commence the required proceedings for a judicial determination of whether the alleged acts or omissions constituted a breach.

The Applicants contended that the only real issue in this matter was the amount to be awarded as damages because the other issues could be decided on the basis of the record before the Court. Sword opposed the Application on the grounds that certain facts were in dispute, the interpretation of the Lease by the Applicants was incorrect, and these genuine, triable issues could only be determined by the Court after a weighing of the evidence at Trial.

After reviewing the evidence, the Court determined that the Applicant’s reproductions of certain portions of the Lease were not accurate, and that Sword had adduced “some evidence” tending to establish a defence. The Court further pointed to several instances of legal issue intertwined with the facts which would require a Trial for determination. In the result, Manderscheid J. dismissed the Applicant’s Summary Judgment Application.