Montreal Investment and Realty Co. v. Sarault

Montreal Investment and Realty Co. v. Sarault

Majority held that on the evidence the respondent's acts did not constitute ratification or confirmation: where the alleged error affected identity and/or where subsequent acts were performed under pressure to avoid forfeiture or litigation they were not voluntary confirmations, and therefore rescission for fraud was available; accordingly the judgments below setting aside the sale were upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Citation
(1918) 57 SCR 464
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Montreal Investment and Realty Co.; Respondent/plaintiff: Anna Sarault
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 June 1916
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Sale/contract Rescission (misrepresentation) / On Appeal From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec to Supreme Court of Canada
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgments of Superior Court and Court of King's Bench affirming rescission maintained
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Rescission, Ratification/confirmation, Voidable Contract, Forfeiture Clause, Non‑joinder
Source Language
English
Contract Law Property Law Civil Procedure Equity Misrepresentation Rescission Ratification/confirmation Voidable Contract +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Montreal Investment and Realty Co.

Appellant/defendant

Anna Sarault

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Sale/contract Rescission (misrepresentation) / On Appeal From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec to Supreme Court of Canada

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the purchaser's subsequent acts (payment of instalment and granting options) constituted ratification/confirmation of a contract obtained by fraud
  2. 2 Whether error as to identity of lots precludes the possibility of confirmation
  3. 3 Whether payment made to avoid forfeiture or under pressure is voluntary and can operate as confirmation

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held that on the evidence the respondent's acts did not constitute ratification or confirmation: where the alleged error affected identity and/or where subsequent acts were performed under pressure to avoid forfeiture or litigation they were not voluntary confirmations, and therefore rescission for fraud was available; accordingly the judgments below setting aside the sale were upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgments of Superior Court and Court of King's Bench affirming rescission maintained

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of Court of King's Bench and Superior Court confirmed