George Wimpey Canada Ltd. v. Focal Properties Ltd.

George Wimpey Canada Ltd. v. Focal Properties Ltd.

The contract came to an end on the stipulated closing date because time was of the essence and registration of the subdivision plans was a condition precedent; in the absence of mutual agreement to extend the closing date, the contractual obligations terminated on that date, warranting dismissal of the appeal.

Citation
[1978] 1 SCR 2
Parties
Appellant/defendant: George Wimpey Canada Limited; Respondent/plaintiff: Focal Properties Limited (formerly Brumac Developments Limited)
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 June 1977
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario; Judgment Dismissing Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgments at trial and on appeal affirmed on the ground that the contract expired on the closing date.
Legal Topics
Sale of Land, Condition Precedent, Frustration of Contract, Time of the Essence, Subdivision Plan Registration
Source Language
English
Contract Property Planning/administrative Law Sale of Land Condition Precedent Frustration of Contract Time of the Essence Subdivision Plan Registration

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Wimpey Canada Limited

Appellant/defendant

Focal Properties Limited (formerly Brumac Developments Limited)

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario; Judgment Dismissing Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to register subdivision plans by the closing date ended the agreements by their terms
  2. 2 Whether the contracts were frustrated by impossibility of performance within a foreseeable period
  3. 3 Whether the obligation to obtain registration was a condition precedent and time was of the essence

Ratio Decidendi

The contract came to an end on the stipulated closing date because time was of the essence and registration of the subdivision plans was a condition precedent; in the absence of mutual agreement to extend the closing date, the contractual obligations terminated on that date, warranting dismissal of the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgments at trial and on appeal affirmed on the ground that the contract expired on the closing date.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgments at trial and on appeal affirmed