Prudential Trust Co. et al. v. Forseth

Prudential Trust Co. et al. v. Forseth

Because the assignment was read aloud to a literate signatory who thereby must be presumed to know the nature of the document, the plea of non est factum failed; the trial judge's positive credibility findings should not have been reversed on appeal; the assignment lawfully conveyed an undivided one-half interest including one-half of royalties; the Homesteads Act formalities were met and s.7(3) protects the bona fide purchaser; the Security Frauds Prevention Act did not apply; and the option provision was not declared void for perpetuity as it could be construed as a personal covenant.

Citation
[1960] SCR 210
Parties
Defendant Appellant: Prudential Trust Company Limited; Defendant Appellant: Canadian Williston Minerals Limited; Plaintiff Respondent: Harry G. Forseth; Plaintiff Respondent: Emma Jensina Forseth
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 December 1959
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan / On Appeal; Judgment on Merits (appeal Allowed)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; action to set aside assignment dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Est Factum, Mines and Minerals, Option to Lease, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Homesteads Act Compliance, Security Frauds Prevention Act, Rule Against Perpetuities, Bona Fide Purchaser for Value
Source Language
English
Contract Property Trusts Securities Equity Non Est Factum Mines and Minerals Option to Lease +5 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prudential Trust Company Limited

Defendant Appellant

Canadian Williston Minerals Limited

Defendant Appellant

Harry G. Forseth

Plaintiff Respondent

Emma Jensina Forseth

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan / On Appeal; Judgment on Merits (appeal Allowed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plea of non est factum could be sustained where the assignment was read aloud to the signatory
  2. 2 Whether assignment conveyed an undivided one-half interest including one-half of royalties under existing lease
  3. 3 Whether wife’s consent and certificate complied with The Homesteads Act and whether transferee is protected by s.7(3)

Ratio Decidendi

Because the assignment was read aloud to a literate signatory who thereby must be presumed to know the nature of the document, the plea of non est factum failed; the trial judge's positive credibility findings should not have been reversed on appeal; the assignment lawfully conveyed an undivided one-half interest including one-half of royalties; the Homesteads Act formalities were met and s.7(3) protects the bona fide purchaser; the Security Frauds Prevention Act did not apply; and the option provision was not declared void for perpetuity as it could be construed as a personal covenant.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; action to set aside assignment dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs in this Court and in the Court of Appeal
  • Action dismissed; defendants/appellants entitled to enforce the assignment against plaintiffs