Webb v. Dipenta

Webb v. Dipenta

Although Reeves, as a registered bona fide purchaser, held legal title free of prior equitable claims under the Registry Act, the unregistered option remained binding on Webb and, after actual notice, on Reeves to the extent of available equitable relief; equity permits recovery cy-près of unpaid purchase money from Reeves, but a vendor's lien could not be declared without pleadings or evidence and the bank claiming an assignment of proceeds must be added as a party to determine priorities — accordingly the appellate judgment was upheld except the declaration of a vendor's lien, and the matter was remitted to add the bank and determine priorities.

Citation
[1925] SCR 565
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Peter J. Webb; Appellant (defendant): A. W. Reeves; Respondent (plaintiff): Felix Dipenta; Respondent (plaintiff): Tony D. Pistone; Respondent (plaintiff): Alex. Martinello
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 December 1924
Procedural Posture
Appeal: Contract (specific Performance) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (en Banc) — Final Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part and judgment of Nova Scotia en banc varied and remitted to determine third‑party priorities
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Vendor's Lien, Bona Fide Purchaser, Registry Act Priorities, Assignment and Priorities, Pleadings and Amendment, Costs
Source Language
English
Contract Equity Property Law Real Property Procedural Law Specific Performance Vendor's Lien Bona Fide Purchaser +4 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter J. Webb

Appellant (defendant)

A. W. Reeves

Appellant (defendant)

Felix Dipenta

Respondent (plaintiff)

Tony D. Pistone

Respondent (plaintiff)

Alex. Martinello

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Appeal: Contract (specific Performance) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (en Banc) — Final Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether specific performance could be decreed against a purchaser who had conveyed his interest to a registered bona fide purchaser without notice
  2. 2 Effect of the Nova Scotia Registry Act (R.S.N.S. 1900, c.137, s.15) on equitable interests and remedies
  3. 3 Whether unpaid purchase money could be recovered from the bona fide purchaser cy-près

Ratio Decidendi

Although Reeves, as a registered bona fide purchaser, held legal title free of prior equitable claims under the Registry Act, the unregistered option remained binding on Webb and, after actual notice, on Reeves to the extent of available equitable relief; equity permits recovery cy-près of unpaid purchase money from Reeves, but a vendor's lien could not be declared without pleadings or evidence and the bank claiming an assignment of proceeds must be added as a party to determine priorities — accordingly the appellate judgment was upheld except the declaration of a vendor's lien, and the matter was remitted to add the bank and determine priorities.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part and judgment of Nova Scotia en banc varied and remitted to determine third‑party priorities

Orders

  • Strike out declaration of vendor's lien and charge in favour of Webb from the en banc judgment
  • Remit the action to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia to add the Canadian Bank of Commerce as a party and to inquire into and determine the respective priorities of the appellants and the bank with respect to the moneys payable under the Webb‑Reeves agreement