Majority
GIRoUARD J. stated that he did not take part in the judgment as there was a majority without him. (His Lordship having formerly acted as counsel for the Province of Quebec, sat only by consent of the . parties at the hearing of this appeal in order to form a quorum.)
Appeal dismissed. Solicitor for the appellant: N. W. Trenholme. Solicitor for the respondent: W.
THE TOWN OF RICHMOND (PLAIN- APPELLANT' TIFF)..........
*Oct. AND
*Nov. 29. JOSEPH L. LAFONTAINE AND
RESPONDENTS. OTHERS (DEFENDANTS).............
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH FOR LOWER CANADA (APPEAL SIDE.)
Judgment of the Court
am of the opinion that this appeal must be dismissed.
It would not be just and equitable now to rescind this contract after some fifteen years enjoyment by the appellant of the respondents works and when the respondents can no longer be put in their original position. The respondents ought to have been put en demeure. It is impossible now after the long delay which has occurred since the protest of .
the 10th July, 1883, to give any effect to that act. It must by the subsequent acceptance and use of the Chief waterworks by the appellant be deemed to have been waived.
I agree in the judgment of the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal that the appellant should have given the notice required by the contract.
The appeal must be dismissed with costs.
Appeal dismissed with costs.