does not seem that there was any connection or negotiation
between the plaintiffs and the hotel until the plaintiffs checked
in. As for consideration, the plaintiffs largely paid with TD
Travel Rewards points that were obviously accumulated with a
TD Visa card. I think it is obvious that the plaintiffs collected TD
travel rewards points so that they could use them through the
TD Visa Travel Rewards service. I seriously doubt (and certainly
there was no evidence to suggest) that the plaintiffs points could
be redeemed directly with the hotel. The remainder of $78.18
was paid in Canadian dollars. It may be that the actual contract
was between the plaintiffs and the hotel, but the one-page electronic invoice does not show that. I think it is a much stronger
argument that the contract was formed when the plaintiffs
actually checked into the hotel in London and that the legal
aspects of their stay was governed by the U.K. equivalent of the
Innkeeper’s Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.7.
 Even if there was a contract that was entered into
between the hotel and the plaintiffs in Ontario, it was merely for
accommodations. The contract has nothing to do with the dispute between the parties, which is a classic action for negligence.
Accordingly, I find that there was no contract connected with the
dispute that was created in Ontario.
Forum Non Conveniens
 The parties contest whether Ontario is the proper
jurisdiction for this case, even if I were to find that there is
jurisdiction. Since I have decided that there is no jurisdiction,
it is not necessary for me to decide this point. Had I found
jurisdiction, I would still have granted the motion as I have no
hesitation in saying that the United Kingdom is the appropriate jurisdiction.
 The motion is granted and the action is dismissed with
costs to the moving party. If the parties are unable to agree on
an amount, the defendant hotel may file submissions within
14 days of this judgment. The responding plaintiffs may file
submissions after a further ten days.