Carroll v. Erie County Natural Gas and Fuel Co.

Carroll v. Erie County Natural Gas and Fuel Co.

The prior judgment on construction did not decide a claim for rectification and therefore did not operate as res judicata; the evidence supported that defendants had notice and were not bona fide purchasers for value without notice; damages may be awarded in a rectification action; accordingly the Court allowed the appeal and restored the trial judgment reforming the deed.

Citation
(1899) 29 SCR 591
Parties
Appellant Plaintiff: Samuel S. Carroll; Appellant Plaintiff: William E. Carroll; Respondent Defendant: The Erie County Natural Gas and Fuel Company; Respondent Defendant: The Provincial Natural Gas and Fuel Company of Ontario
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 June 1899
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Rectification of Deed / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Judgment)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Court of Appeal judgment vacated; trial judgment ordering rectification restored.
Legal Topics
Rectification, Res Judicata, Damages, Notice, Bona Fide Purchaser
Source Language
English
Property Contract Equity Civil Procedure Rectification Res Judicata Damages Notice +1 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel S. Carroll

Appellant Plaintiff

William E. Carroll

Appellant Plaintiff

The Erie County Natural Gas and Fuel Company

Respondent Defendant

The Provincial Natural Gas and Fuel Company of Ontario

Respondent Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Rectification of Deed / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a second action for rectification of a deed is barred by res judicata by a prior action on construction of the same deed
  2. 2 Whether defendants were bona fide purchasers for value without notice (i.e. whether notice of the mistake had been brought home)
  3. 3 Whether damages can be awarded in an action for rectification

Ratio Decidendi

The prior judgment on construction did not decide a claim for rectification and therefore did not operate as res judicata; the evidence supported that defendants had notice and were not bona fide purchasers for value without notice; damages may be awarded in a rectification action; accordingly the Court allowed the appeal and restored the trial judgment reforming the deed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Court of Appeal judgment vacated; trial judgment ordering rectification restored.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs to the appellants in all the courts
  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal vacated