In Fowlie et al v. Wrestling Canada Lutte et al (Ont Divisional Ct, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed an appeal, without leave to amend the pleadings, against an interlocutory order that declined to strike a cause of action.
Here the court hold that contract interpretation should be performed holistically:
26. It is well-established that a contract should be interpreted in a manner that gives meaning to all of its terms and avoids an interpretation that would render one or more of its terms ineffective or would result in a commercial absurdity: 2249778 Ontario Inc. v. Smith, 2014 ONCA 788, at para. 19; and Toronto Dominion Bank v Leigh Instruments Ltd. (Trustee of), 1998 CanLII 14806 (ON SC), 1998 CarswellOnt 2565 (Ont. Gen. Div. [Commercial List]), at para. 409, affirmed 1999 CarswellOnt 2812 (Ont. C.A.), leave to appeal refused 2000 CarswellOnt 2983 (S.C.C.).
27. One cannot focus only on specific clauses, or parts of clauses, without considering the contract as a whole: ATCO Electric Limited v. Alberta (Energy and Utilities Board), 2004 ABCA 215, at para. 77.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
