Neider v. Carda of Peace River District Limited

Neider v. Carda of Peace River District Limited

An agreement entered into on the Lord's Day is illegal and unenforceable under the Lord's Day Act and Land Titles Act; registration obtained by falsified documents and fraud does not perfect title and the respondent cannot rely on its own illegal agreement or its fraud to retain title; therefore the transfers are null and title must be restored to the appellant.

Citation
[1972] SCR 678
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Lucie Neider; Defendant/respondent: Carda of Peace River District Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 March 1972
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Alberta, Appellate Division to the Supreme Court of Canada
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of trial judge restored
Legal Topics
Sale of Land, Lord's Day Act, Illegality and in Pari Delicto, Land Titles Registration, Fraudulent Registration
Source Language
English

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lucie Neider

Plaintiff/appellant

Carda of Peace River District Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Alberta, Appellate Division to the Supreme Court of Canada

  1. 1 Whether the agreement/transfer executed on a Sunday was illegal under the Lord's Day Act s.4 and void under Land Titles Act s.67
  2. 2 Whether registration of transfers completed with false dates and affidavits could perfect title
  3. 3 Whether the respondent could retain title despite the illegality and its own fraud (in pari delicto)

Ratio Decidendi

An agreement entered into on the Lord's Day is illegal and unenforceable under the Lord's Day Act and Land Titles Act; registration obtained by falsified documents and fraud does not perfect title and the respondent cannot rely on its own illegal agreement or its fraud to retain title; therefore the transfers are null and title must be restored to the appellant.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of trial judge restored

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Judgment of O'Byrne J. restored