Hyperlawhypertext legal database De Jong v. Gechter et al. [1978] 2 SCR 62

← Cases

De Jong v. Gechter et al.

[1978] 2 SCR 62 Court SCC Decision date 1977-10-27 English

PartiesNick De Jong (Plaintiff) Appellant·Bernhard Gechter and Raymonde Gechter (Defendants) Respondents

Counsel (4)
E.W.N. Macdonald and R.B. Miskuski, for the plaintiff, appellant.
D.J. Chernichen, for the defendants, respondents.
Solicitors for the plaintiff, appellant: McClung, Frohlich & Rand, Edmonton.
Solicitors for the defendants, respondents: Harradence & Co., Calgary.

Judges Martland, Ronald; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Spence, Wishart Flett; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; Pratte, Yves

Decision 6–1 Majority (6) · MARTLAND J. (1)

On appeal from Alberta

Subjects Property law

Contents

Majority

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

MARTLAND J.

MARTLAND J.—We are all of the opinion that the basis on which the Appellate Division found the existence of an implied condition precedent cannot stand, particularly in the light of the reasons of this Court in Senstad v. Makus[2], which were delivered after the judgment of the Appellate Division in the present case. The appeal is allowed the judgment of the Appellate Division is set aside and the judgment at trial is restored except that the time period fixed in para. 4 of that judgment is altered so as to provide for a period of one month from October 27, 1977. The appellant is entitled to costs in this Court and in the Court below.
[Page 63]
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the plaintiff, appellant: McClung, Frohlich & Rand, Edmonton.
Solicitors for the defendants, respondents: Harradence & Co., Calgary.

Footnotes

  1. [1] (1976), 1 Alta. L.R. (2d) 82.
  2. [2] [1978] 2 S.C.R. 44.