Background: The litigation centered around the proper location of an easement on Morrison's property, which provides access to the respondents' property. This was the second round of litigation regarding this issue, the first having established the existence and general location of the easement.

Legal Issues: The appeal focused on whether the case was appropriate for resolution via a summary trial. The main contention was the reliability and acceptability of survey reports regarding the easement's location. Morrison challenged the trial judge's decision to accept the respondents' survey report which placed the easement aligned with the existing road used historically, as opposed to his surveyor's differing report.

Held: The courts had previously concluded that the easement followed the historically used road. Morrison's recent appeal argued that this decision was incorrect and that there was insufficient evidence to support the respondents' surveyor’s findings. However, the Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's findings, noting the respondents’ survey aligned with judicial findings from previous litigation.

Costs/Award: The Court of Appeal dismissed Morrison's application for leave to extend the time to serve his notice of appeal, resulting in the appeal being dismissed. Costs were awarded to the respondents, although the document did not specify the total amount.