The Bank of Nova Scotia v. 1860384 Ontario Inc.

The Bank of Nova Scotia v. 1860384 Ontario Inc.

The motion judge properly found no genuine issue for trial because the appellants failed to prove they relied on the bank's small business advisor to the exclusion of other sources, failed to show the bank had a sufficient role or breached a duty, and failed to establish causation between any alleged bank conduct and their business losses; accordingly summary judgment for the bank was justified.

Citation
2019 ONCA 445
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim (respondent): The Bank of Nova Scotia; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim (appellant): 1860384 Ontario Inc.; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim (appellant): Kathy Wilkes; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim (appellant): Christopher Wilkes
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Collection / Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Duty to Advise, Reliance, Causation, Bank Liability, Costs
Source Language
English
Civil Banking Commercial Law Contract Guarantee Summary Judgment Duty to Advise Reliance +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Bank of Nova Scotia

Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim (respondent)

1860384 Ontario Inc.

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim (appellant)

Kathy Wilkes

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim (appellant)

Christopher Wilkes

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Collection / Appeal From Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants established a genuine issue for trial on their counterclaim based on alleged reliance on bank advice
  2. 2 Whether the bank owed a duty and breached it by failing to warn appellants about franchise risks
  3. 3 Whether any alleged breach was causally connected to the appellants' losses

Ratio Decidendi

The motion judge properly found no genuine issue for trial because the appellants failed to prove they relied on the bank's small business advisor to the exclusion of other sources, failed to show the bank had a sufficient role or breached a duty, and failed to establish causation between any alleged bank conduct and their business losses; accordingly summary judgment for the bank was justified.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered for the respondent bank for approximately $275,000
  • Respondent awarded costs of $5,000