Zhang v. Tsai

Zhang v. Tsai

The appeal was allowed because the Rescission and Misrepresentation Action and the Specific Performance Action are so interwoven that the summary trial judge erred in deciding the specific performance application before resolving the rescission issues; rescission, if established, could negate any assignment and make specific performance unavailable, so the two actions must be tried together or sequentially as contemplated by the procedural order to avoid inconsistent findings.

Citation
2017 BCCA 371
Parties
Respondent / Plaintiff: Lian Zhang; Appellant / Defendant: Wen Hsien Tsai
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Contract (specific Performance and Rescission) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Summary Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; orders of the court below set aside; matter remitted to trial together or sequentially as contemplated by the procedural order; appellant awarded costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Rescission, Assignment of Contract, Misrepresentation, Procedural Consolidation, Regulation of Assignments (shadow Flipping)
Source Language
English
Contract Law Equity Property Law Civil Procedure Specific Performance Rescission Assignment of Contract Misrepresentation +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lian Zhang

Respondent / Plaintiff

Wen Hsien Tsai

Appellant / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Contract (specific Performance and Rescission) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Summary Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a summary trial for specific performance could properly proceed prior to or separate from a trial on the rescission and misrepresentation action
  2. 2 Whether specific performance was an appropriate remedy on the facts given allegations of misrepresentation and possible rescission
  3. 3 Whether assignments were valid and enforceable prior to determination of alleged misrepresentations and conspiracy

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the Rescission and Misrepresentation Action and the Specific Performance Action are so interwoven that the summary trial judge erred in deciding the specific performance application before resolving the rescission issues; rescission, if established, could negate any assignment and make specific performance unavailable, so the two actions must be tried together or sequentially as contemplated by the procedural order to avoid inconsistent findings.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; orders of the court below set aside; matter remitted to trial together or sequentially as contemplated by the procedural order; appellant awarded costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and orders of the Supreme Court of British Columbia below set aside
  • Rescission and Misrepresentation Action and Specific Performance Action to be tried together or sequentially as contemplated by the Procedural Order