Kloepfer Wholesale Hardware v. Roy

Kloepfer Wholesale Hardware v. Roy

Where a vendor unequivocally repudiated a binding written contract for sale of land before the completion date, the purchaser was immediately entitled to seek a declaratory judgment that the contract was binding and to seek specific performance; the action was not premature, defences of misrepresentation,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1952] 2 SCR 465
Parties
Appellant (vendor): Kloepfer Wholesale Hardware and Automotive Company Limited; Respondent (purchaser): R.G. Roy
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 June 1952
Procedural Posture
Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada; Specific Performance of Contract for Sale of Land / Final Decision on Appeal (judgment Dismissing Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment for respondent affirmed
Legal Topics
Anticipatory Breach, Specific Performance, Declaratory Judgment, Statute of Frauds, Misrepresentation, Mistake, Tender, Injunction, Election
Source Language
english
Contract Law Equity Property Law Procedural Law Sale of Land Anticipatory Breach Specific Performance Declaratory Judgment +6 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Kloepfer Wholesale Hardware and Automotive Company Limited

Appellant (vendor)

R.G. Roy

Respondent (purchaser)

Procedural Posture

Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada; Specific Performance of Contract for Sale of Land / Final Decision on Appeal (judgment Dismissing Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an action brought after an anticipatory repudiation but before the date fixed for performance is premature
  2. 2 Whether anticipatory breach permits a plaintiff to obtain a declaratory judgment and specific performance
  3. 3 Whether the contract was void for misrepresentation or mistake

Ratio Decidendi

Where a vendor unequivocally repudiated a binding written contract for sale of land before the completion date, the purchaser was immediately entitled to seek a declaratory judgment that the contract was binding and to seek specific performance; the action was not premature, defences of misrepresentation, uncertainty and mistake failed on the evidence, and tender was unnecessary because the vendor had clearly refused performance.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment for respondent affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Declaration that the contract dated November 29, 1949 is a binding contract and ought to be specifically performed