Wallace et al. v. Hesslein et al.

Wallace et al. v. Hesslein et al.

Because the purchaser was not prompt, had not sought title, had taken possession and made improvements (waiving objections), and had expressly declared inability to complete the purchase, he was not entitled to specific performance; the vendors were entitled to possession and damages (mesne profits).

Citation
(1898) 29 SCR 171
Parties
Appellant Defendant: Thomas J. Wallace; Appellant Defendant: Maria Kearney; Respondent Plaintiff: Alexander G. Hesslein; Respondent Plaintiff: Lewis J. Hesslein
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 November 1898
Procedural Posture
Sale of Land Specific Performance and Possession / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of Nova Scotia; Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment for respondents for possession and damages for mesne profits affirmed.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Laches, Waiver, Possession, Title Defects, Mesne Profits
Source Language
English
Property Contract Equity Civil Procedure Specific Performance Laches Waiver Possession +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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas J. Wallace

Appellant Defendant

Maria Kearney

Appellant Defendant

Alexander G. Hesslein

Respondent Plaintiff

Lewis J. Hesslein

Respondent Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Sale of Land Specific Performance and Possession / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of Nova Scotia; Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether purchaser in possession but late and having declared inability to pay is entitled to specific performance
  2. 2 Whether taking possession and making improvements waived objections to vendor's title
  3. 3 Whether vendor entitled to recover possession and mesne profits where vendee defaulted and admitted inability to complete

Ratio Decidendi

Because the purchaser was not prompt, had not sought title, had taken possession and made improvements (waiving objections), and had expressly declared inability to complete the purchase, he was not entitled to specific performance; the vendors were entitled to possession and damages (mesne profits).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment for respondents for possession and damages for mesne profits affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment for plaintiffs/respondents for possession of the property.