Louch v. Pape Avenue Land Co., Ltd.

Louch v. Pape Avenue Land Co., Ltd.

Clause 8 of the agreement was properly invoked: the purchaser made valid written objections which the vendor was unable or unwilling to remove, the vendor validly rescinded pursuant to that clause, the vendor’s conduct did not amount to an election to abandon the rescission right, and the contractual rescission right displaced any claim by the purchaser to insist on specific performance with compensation.

Citation
[1928] SCR 518
Parties
Appellant/purchaser/plaintiff: William Louch; Respondent/vendor/defendant: Pape Avenue Land Company Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 June 1928
Procedural Posture
Appeal; Application Under Rules 605 and 606 Concerning Sale of Land / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; agreement declared null and void pursuant to clause 8; deposit to be returned and caution vacated on repayment.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Rescission, Title Objections, Sale of Land, Conditions Precedent
Source Language
English
Property Law Contract Law Equity Specific Performance Rescission Title Objections Sale of Land Conditions Precedent

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Louch

Appellant/purchaser/plaintiff

Pape Avenue Land Company Limited

Respondent/vendor/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal; Application Under Rules 605 and 606 Concerning Sale of Land / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause permitting rescission for valid objections which vendor is unable or unwilling to remove was properly invoked
  2. 2 Whether vendor by conduct elected to abandon its contractual right to rescind
  3. 3 Whether purchaser could insist on specific performance with compensation despite an express contractual rescission clause

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 8 of the agreement was properly invoked: the purchaser made valid written objections which the vendor was unable or unwilling to remove, the vendor validly rescinded pursuant to that clause, the vendor’s conduct did not amount to an election to abandon the rescission right, and the contractual rescission right displaced any claim by the purchaser to insist on specific performance with compensation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; agreement declared null and void pursuant to clause 8; deposit to be returned and caution vacated on repayment.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to respondent
  • Declaration that the agreement was null and void under clause 8