Ontario(1), affirming the judgment of a Divisional Court(2), which set aside the verdict for defendant at the trial and ordered specific performance of a contract for .the sale of land.
The plaintiff, Foster, made an offer by letter to purchase defendant's land in Toronto, describing it as "No. 22 Ann Street," and stating the dimensions. The deed was to be prepared at vendor's expense and there was a provision that "time shall be of the essence of this offer."
The defence to the plaintiff's action for specific performance of the contract to purchase was that plaintiff had not performed his part within the time limited by the offer and that the description the property being defective, as there was no lot Ann Street numbered 22, the Statute of Frauds was not complied with.
The Court of Appeal held that time was of the essence of all the terms of the contract and did not relate only to the acceptance of the offer as held by the Divisional Court; that the delay by the plaintiff was due to defendant's failure to prepare the deed and was, therefore, no answer to the action; and that as the property was sufficiently described without reference the number of the lot the Statute of Frauds was complied with.
After hearing counsel on behalf of both parties, the Supreme Court of Canada reserved judgment and, on a subsequent day, dismissed the appeal.
Watson K.O. for the appellant.
Marsh K.C. for the respondent.
for Manitoba (1), affirming the judgment of Dubuc C.J., at the trial, by which the plaintiffs' action was dismissed with costs.
The decision of the case depended upon evidence as to the condition of frozen meat placed in cold storage by the plaintiffs in the defendants' warehouse for safekeeping.
The trial judge found that the evidence established that the meat was in good and sound condition when delivered at the defendants' warehouse; that the warehouse was properly constructed for the purpose of cold storage, the plant of first-class modern type and sufficient power; that it was operated with proper care and by men of sufficient knowledge to conduct the business in an ordinary satisfactory manner, and that the actual cause of the spoiling of the meat, for which damages were claimed, had not been disclosed by the evidence. The judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' action was affirmed by the judgment now appealed from.
After hearing counsel for the parties on the appeal, the Supreme Court reserved judgment and, on a subsequent day, the appeal was dismissed with costs. Appeal dismissed with costs. Wallace Nesbitt K.O. for the appellants.
Ewart K.C. for the respondents.