McDougall v. MacKay

McDougall v. MacKay

The written agreement of June 22 sufficiently embodied the oral agreement of June 21 to satisfy the Statute of Frauds as a memorandum; therefore MacKay obtained an equitable interest as of June 21 which, being prior in time to Rusconi's, prevailed because the equities were equal and Rusconi failed to plead or prove he was a purchaser for value without notice; registration of MacKay's caveat preserved his priority; appeal dismissed.

Citation
(1922) 64 SCR 1
Parties
Appellants/defendants: Eliza J. McDougall and Others; Respondent/plaintiff: R. G. MacKay; Defendant/subsequent Purchaser: R. (Rusconi)
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 May 1922
Procedural Posture
Specific Performance of Sale of Land; Equity Dispute Over Priority of Equitable Interests / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan affirmed.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Caveat, Priority of Equitable Interests, Statute of Frauds Memorandum, Purchaser for Value Without Notice
Source Language
English
Property Equity Contract Law Evidence (statute of Frauds) Specific Performance Caveat Priority of Equitable Interests Statute of Frauds Memorandum +1 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eliza J. McDougall and Others

Appellants/defendants

R. G. MacKay

Respondent/plaintiff

R. (Rusconi)

Defendant/subsequent Purchaser

Procedural Posture

Specific Performance of Sale of Land; Equity Dispute Over Priority of Equitable Interests / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the written agreement of June 22 constituted a sufficient memorandum to satisfy the Statute of Frauds for the oral agreement of June 21
  2. 2 Whether MacKay's equitable interest was prior in time to Rusconi's and therefore entitled to priority
  3. 3 Whether Rusconi was a purchaser for value without notice and thus could defeat MacKay's prior equity

Ratio Decidendi

The written agreement of June 22 sufficiently embodied the oral agreement of June 21 to satisfy the Statute of Frauds as a memorandum; therefore MacKay obtained an equitable interest as of June 21 which, being prior in time to Rusconi's, prevailed because the equities were equal and Rusconi failed to plead or prove he was a purchaser for value without notice; registration of MacKay's caveat preserved his priority; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan (15 Sask. L.R. 24) affirmed