Vancouver Action: The appellants claimed they had repaid a $120,000 mortgage-secured loan in 2006 and sought proceeds from a 2011 property sale. The trial judge dismissed the claim, finding no proof that the loan's principal amount had been repaid with a $200,000 bank draft. The judge noted issues with poor documentation and the credibility of both parties. The appellate court upheld the dismissal, agreeing there was no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's findings.

New Westminster Action: The appellants sought recovery for overpayments on personal loans, arguing the claims were not statute-barred. The trial judge dismissed the action, determining the claims were statute-barred and that the appellants had not proven the overpayment claims. The appellate court upheld this dismissal, concurring with the statute-barred ruling and the finding that the appellants failed to substantiate their claims.

Legal Arguments/Issues: In the Vancouver Action, the key issue was whether the $200,000 payment in 2006 repaid the mortgage loan principal, which the judge found unsupported by evidence. In the New Westminster Action, the main issue was whether the overpayment claims were statute-barred and supported by sufficient evidence.

Costs/Awards: The appellate court declined to award special costs, adhering to the conventional order on costs, resulting in no specific costs being awarded to the respondents.