The Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s Application for Summary Judgment because the Plaintiff was unable to show, pursuant to Rule 7.3, that there was no defence to the claim or part of it, or that the only real issue was the amount to be awarded.

Justice Ackerl found much of the Plaintiff’s evidence to be inadmissible, as key portions came from the transcripts of the Part 5 Questioning of two individuals. Pursuant to Rule 6.11, the Court could only consider the answers from Part 5 Questioning if those answers could be used under Rule 5.31. The Court found that, according to Rule 5.31, each individual’s answers at Questioning could only be used as against themselves. The answers from Part 5 Questioning were not admissible in the Summary Judgment Application against the Defendant company.

Justice Ackerl found that he could not fairly resolve the dispute on a summary basis and denied the Application.