Krause v. York

Krause v. York

The plaintiff's present claims (resale loss, repairs, taxes) were all before the court in the earlier action—urged as reasons to deny return of payments—so they were finally adjudicated and are barred by res judicata; therefore the subsequent action could not be maintained.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1932] SCR 548
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Louise R. Krause; Defendant/respondent: Frank J. York
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 March 1932
Procedural Posture
Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division (ontario); Underlying Actions: Vendor's Action for Cancellation and Possession and Subsequent Action for Damages / Final Appeal Decided by Supreme Court (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Appellate Division (dismissing plaintiff's action) affirmed.
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Forfeiture Clause as Liquidated Damages, Cancellation of Contract, Damages for Resale, Taxes and Repairs
Source Language
english
Property Contract Civil Procedure Res Judicata Forfeiture Clause as Liquidated Damages Cancellation of Contract Damages for Resale Taxes and Repairs

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Louise R. Krause

Plaintiff/appellant

Frank J. York

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division (ontario); Underlying Actions: Vendor's Action for Cancellation and Possession and Subsequent Action for Damages / Final Appeal Decided by Supreme Court (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claims for loss on resale, repairs and taxes were barred by res judicata because they had been raised in the prior action
  2. 2 Whether the forfeiture clause operated as liquidated damages and barred recovery of instalments

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's present claims (resale loss, repairs, taxes) were all before the court in the earlier action—urged as reasons to deny return of payments—so they were finally adjudicated and are barred by res judicata; therefore the subsequent action could not be maintained.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Appellate Division (dismissing plaintiff's action) affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of Appellate Division, Ontario affirmed; action dismissed