The Appellant sold a car to the Respondent “as is.” Minutes later, the engine of the car exploded. The buyer won damages at Trial, and the seller appealed, alleging factual errors. The Appellant sought to admit fresh evidence on Appeal pursuant to Rule 6.14.

The Appellant argued that the Court should take a "hybrid approach," combining an Appeal on the record with a partial de novo hearing based on the fresh evidence. Justice Devlin considered the test for fresh evidence on Appeal. He stated there is no such thing as a hybrid Appeal. Either the Appeal is heard on the record or it is heard de novo. Further, the Appellant failed to meet the criteria for fresh evidence, as the evidence he sought to enter was in the Appellant’s possession before the initial Trial, lacked credibility, and was not available for cross-examination.

Justice Devlin ultimately dismissed the entire Appeal, finding that no palpable and overriding error was shown and the arguable error would not have led to a different result. Pursuant to Rule 14.75, Devlin J. dismissed the Appeal.