Walker v. Blades

Walker v. Blades

The Court of Appeal (Donald J.A., Finch C.J. concurring) allowed the appeal because there was no reasonable basis for finding the buyer repudiated the contract by proposing a solicitors' method of closing; the December 2 letter did not unilaterally vary the contract in a manner that evinced intention not to be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2007 BCCA 436
Parties
Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal (plaintiff): Christopher Michael Walker; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal (defendant): Mary Kathleen Blades; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal (defendant): Cherry Point Marina Ltd.
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Trial Judgment Seeking Specific Performance of a Contract for Sale of Marina Assets / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; trial judgment dismissed; order for specific performance granted to appellant; cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Repudiation and Anticipatory Breach, Completion/place of Closing, Interpretation of Standard Form Contracts, Pleading Requirements
Source Language
english
Contract Law Property Law Civil Remedies Real Estate Conveyancing Specific Performance Repudiation and Anticipatory Breach Completion/place of Closing Interpretation of Standard Form Contracts +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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Michael Walker

Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal (plaintiff)

Mary Kathleen Blades

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal (defendant)

Cherry Point Marina Ltd.

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Trial Judgment Seeking Specific Performance of a Contract for Sale of Marina Assets / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred by deciding the case on an unpleaded alleged repudiation based on the buyer's proposed closing mechanism
  2. 2 Whether the buyer's December 2, 2004 demand changing place/method of closing amounted to a unilateral variation/repudiation of the interim agreement
  3. 3 Whether the subject property was sufficiently unique to warrant specific performance rather than damages

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal (Donald J.A., Finch C.J. concurring) allowed the appeal because there was no reasonable basis for finding the buyer repudiated the contract by proposing a solicitors' method of closing; the December 2 letter did not unilaterally vary the contract in a manner that evinced intention not to be bound, the respondent gave no contemporaneous objection and the subject property was sufficiently unique to warrant specific performance, so the trial judgment was set aside and specific performance was ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; trial judgment dismissed; order for specific performance granted to appellant; cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Set aside trial judgment
  • Decree of specific performance granted to appellant Christopher Michael Walker to enforce the Contract of Purchase and Sale for Cherry Point Marina