Simson v. Young

Simson v. Young

Majority: The contract's place of performance was Calgary and the vendor, who undertook to prepare the conveyance, was obliged to have it there for delivery at completion; her prolonged failure and the misaddressing of communications made notice futile and excused purchasers' failure to give further notice; under these circumstances specific performance was not available to the vendor and rescission with return of moneys (with interest) and costs was the proper relief. Fitzpatrick C.J. dissented on notice/waiver grounds.

Citation
(1918) 56 SCR 388
Parties
Plaintiff Appellant: James Simson and John Macfarlane; Defendant Respondent: Eileen Young
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 March 1918
Procedural Posture
Sale of Land / Contract for Conveyance (specific Performance and Rescission) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of trial court restored; specific performance denied; rescission granted.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Rescission, Time of the Essence, Place of Performance, Waiver, Tender, Authority of Agent
Source Language
English
Contract Property Equity Agency Specific Performance Rescission Time of the Essence Place of Performance +3 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Simson and John Macfarlane

Plaintiff Appellant

Eileen Young

Defendant Respondent

Procedural Posture

Sale of Land / Contract for Conveyance (specific Performance and Rescission) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the place of performance Calgary notwithstanding vendor resident in Ireland?
  2. 2 Was vendor obliged to have conveyance ready for delivery in Calgary at completion date?
  3. 3 Did purchasers’ conduct amount to waiver or extension of time making time not of the essence?

Ratio Decidendi

Majority: The contract's place of performance was Calgary and the vendor, who undertook to prepare the conveyance, was obliged to have it there for delivery at completion; her prolonged failure and the misaddressing of communications made notice futile and excused purchasers' failure to give further notice; under these circumstances specific performance was not available to the vendor and rescission with return of moneys (with interest) and costs was the proper relief. Fitzpatrick C.J. dissented on notice/waiver grounds.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of trial court restored; specific performance denied; rescission granted.

Orders

  • Rescission of the sale agreement
  • Repayment of moneys paid on account of purchase price with interest