"Fair And Just Result" Or "Unassailable"? Alberta Court Of Appeal Issues Competing Decisions On The Test For Summary Judgment

Just as it appeared our Court of Appeal had clarified the test for summary judgment, several recent and seemingly incongruous decisions may have just taken us a step back.

Following the Supreme Court of Canada's landmark decision in Hryniak v Mauldin, the test for summary judgment in Alberta became an issue that quickly landed before the Alberta Court of Appeal. In Windsor v Canadian Pacific Railway, the court unanimously adopted and affirmed Hryniak, holding that:

[13] ...Summary judgment is now an appropriate procedure where there is no genuine issue requiring a trial:

49 There will be no genuine issue requiring a trial when the judge is able to reach a fair and just determination on the merits on a motion for summary judgment. This will be the case when the process (1) allows the judge to make the necessary findings of fact, (2) allows the judge to apply the law to the facts, and (3) is a proportionate, more expeditious and less expensive means to achieve a