COMM 431 Chapter 8: Case Brief - BMO v. MacCallum
Document Summary
Bank of montreal v. maccallum building supplies ltd. Miramichi builders operated 3 accounts at bmo: operating loan, current, and. Maccallum building supplies ltd. guaranteed a portion of miramichi"s debt. The operating loan, and current account went into default, but not the term loan. Hand writing expert testified that maccallum signed prior to the completion of the documents. Seal of maccallum building supplies ltd. was affirmed after the documents were completed. Case law: cibc v. titus et al. Seal was placed after the documents prepared. Rule 27. 07(4) stipulates that a party must argue all points it intends to rely on and if they do not argue a point the defendant cannot be taken by surprise by points left unsaid. Bmo did not argue indoor management rule. Maccallum was aware of the rule, as evidenced by his defence in. P. 3, and therefore cannot be held to have been taken by surprise by the courts application of royal.
