Van Dyk and Van Dyk v. Durno et al.

Van Dyk and Van Dyk v. Durno et al.

The court held the matter suitable for summary disposition, found no evidentiary support that the vendor was vulnerable or that the price was a substantial undervalue, concluded the contract was valid, found the property sufficiently unique and that defendants anticipatorily repudiated the contract so tender was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2005 BCSC 691
Parties
Plaintiffs: James Leonard Van Dyk and Lara Lynne Van Dyk; Defendants: Shirley Carolyn Durno; Gary Wilson; Deborah Lou Durno also known as Debbie Durno; Gregory Durno also known as Greg Durno; Defendants by Counterclaim: Soren Frederiksen and Crest Realty Ltd. dba RE/Max Crest Realty
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Action for Specific Performance and Damages for Purchase and Sale of Real Property / Summary Trial Application Under Rule 18 a (chambers Decision)
Outcome
Plaintiffs' claim for specific performance and damages allowed; defendants' counterclaim against the plaintiffs dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Unconscionability, Tender and Readiness to Perform, Certificate of Pending Litigation (cpl), Damages and Set‑off
Source Language
english
Contract Law Equity Real Property Law Civil Procedure Specific Performance Unconscionability Tender and Readiness to Perform Certificate of Pending Litigation (cpl) +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Leonard Van Dyk and Lara Lynne Van Dyk

Plaintiffs

Shirley Carolyn Durno; Gary Wilson; Deborah Lou Durno also known as Debbie Durno; Gregory Durno also known as Greg Durno

Defendants

Soren Frederiksen and Crest Realty Ltd. dba RE/Max Crest Realty

Defendants by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Action for Specific Performance and Damages for Purchase and Sale of Real Property / Summary Trial Application Under Rule 18 a (chambers Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Suitability for disposition by summary trial
  2. 2 Whether contract is void for unconscionability
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs were ready, willing and able to complete and thus entitled to specific performance

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the matter suitable for summary disposition, found no evidentiary support that the vendor was vulnerable or that the price was a substantial undervalue, concluded the contract was valid, found the property sufficiently unique and that defendants anticipatorily repudiated the contract so tender was unnecessary, and therefore ordered specific performance plus compensatory damages of $7,010 with the defendants' counterclaim dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' claim for specific performance and damages allowed; defendants' counterclaim against the plaintiffs dismissed

Orders

  • Order for specific performance of the agreement for purchase and sale in favour of the plaintiffs
  • Award to plaintiffs of damages in the amount of 7010 CAD in addition to specific performance