Fung v. Decca Homes Limited

Fung v. Decca Homes Limited

The court held the application judge correctly applied the parol evidence rule; any alleged collateral oral agreement could not contradict the written promissory note, which was unconditional and enforceable, and the indemnity was valid as expressed and made under seal; accordingly the appeal was dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2019 ONCA 848
Parties
Applicant (respondent): Gary Fung; Respondent (appellant): Decca Homes Limited; Respondent (appellant): Javad Akbari Balderlou a.k.a. Javad Akbari-Balderlou a.k.a. Javad Akbari
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Superior Court of Justice Order (heard Oct 22, 2019)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Promissory Note, Parol Evidence Rule, Consideration, Indemnity, Enforcement of Debt
Source Language
english
Contract Civil Procedure Property Promissory Note Parol Evidence Rule Consideration Indemnity Enforcement of Debt

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Gary Fung

Applicant (respondent)

Decca Homes Limited

Respondent (appellant)

Javad Akbari Balderlou a.k.a. Javad Akbari-Balderlou a.k.a. Javad Akbari

Respondent (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Superior Court of Justice Order (heard Oct 22, 2019)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an alleged oral agreement can modify a written promissory note
  2. 2 Whether the written promissory note was unconditional and enforceable
  3. 3 Whether there was consideration for the personal indemnity and effect of seal

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the application judge correctly applied the parol evidence rule; any alleged collateral oral agreement could not contradict the written promissory note, which was unconditional and enforceable, and the indemnity was valid as expressed and made under seal; accordingly the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to the respondent in the amount of $5,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST