OTITI v HAR-PAR INVESTMENTS LTD

The Appellants sought to overturn a Chambers decision dismissing the Appeal of an Applications Judge’s decision granting Summary Dismissal of the Appellant’s Action. The Court noted that the Appellants did not show any reviewable error by the Chambers Judge. Rather, the Appellant’s arguments seemed to be based upon their personal disagreement with the Chambers Judge’s decision.

During the course of the Appeal, Appellants brought a new argument that had not been raised before the Chambers Judge. The Appellants argued that the Respondent failed to comply with Rule 7.3(2), which provides that an Application for Summary Judgment must be supported by an Affidavit demonstrating that the grounds for Summary Judgment had been met. Notwithstanding that this argument had not been raised before the Chambers Judge, the Court held that the Appellants’ position reflected a misunderstanding of Rule 7.3(2) rather than non-compliance on the part of the Respondent. Rule 7.3(2) permits an Applicant to either swear an Affidavit demonstrating that the requirements for Summary Dismissal have been met, or to establish those requirements through other evidence. The Chambers Judge was able to infer those requirements from the Affidavit filed by the Respondent, and was satisfied that the requirements were met.

The Court ultimately dismissed the Appeal due to the Appellants’ failure to identify a reviewable error or to demonstrate that the Respondent had failed to comply with Rule 7.3(2).