Concealment of a fact which would be in the interest of the other party to a contract to know can constitute fraud, but fraud and error are not causes of absolute nullity in contracts but only of relative nullity. Therefore a party to contract will not be entitled to have it aside on that ground, if it proved that subsequently to his discovery of the fraud or error he has confirmed the contract either expressly or tacitly.
The plaintiff sought to have set aside, on the ground of fraud and error, two contracts dealing with the manufacture and sale of a machine invented by the defendant B. The other defendant, P, took part the negotiations of the contracts in an advisory capacity, but did not disclose his partnership with B in the utilization of the patent. Held: Tacit confirmation of the contracts was alleged in the defence to the action, and the plaintiff's conduct in continuing to take full advantage of the contracts long after its discovery of the relationship between the two defendants, amounted to a tacit confirmation. In the circumstances, the question of fraud and error need not be considered and the action should be dismissed.
APPEAL from the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec (1), reversing the judgment at trial and dismissing the action.
Appeal dismissed.
A. M. Watt, Q.C., and L. Tremblay, Q.C., for the plaintiff, appellant.
J. Ahern, Q.C., and E. Lafontaine, for the defendant, respondent.
FAUTEUX J.:-En juin 1951, la compagnie appelante intentait A l'intim6 P6loquin et Hilaire Blanchett une action en annulation de deux contrats intervenus entre elle et Taschereau, Rand, Kellock, Fauteux and Abbott JJ. (1) [19541 Que. Q.B. 674.