Central Trust Co. v. Rafuse
- Citation
- [1988] 1 SCR 1206
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 30 June 1988
- Posture
- Application to Vary Judgment (re‑hearing of Appeal) / Re‑hearing / Motion to Vary Judgment
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 30 June 1988
- Posture
- Application to Vary Judgment (re‑hearing of Appeal) / Re‑hearing / Motion to Vary Judgment
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The application to vary the Court's earlier judgment was allowed because the parties to the pre‑trial agreement had intended interest to run only until the date fixed for the trial judgment (April 14, 1982) and that period should be read as ending on August 9, 1982; accordingly the prior judgment was varied to limit interest to that period.
Court disposition
Application allowed; prior judgment varied on re‑hearing.
Orders
- The judgment of the Court pronounced on October 9, 1986 is varied by adding after the words "April 14, 1982" the words "until August 9, 1982".
- There will be no costs on the motion for a re‑hearing or on the re‑hearing.
02
Material facts
Parties
Central Trust Company
Appellant Counsel: B. A. Crane, Q.C.Jack P. Rafuse
Respondent Counsel: Reginald Cluney, Q.C.Franklyn W. Cordon
Respondent Counsel: Reginald Cluney, Q.C.03
Procedural history
Posture
Application to Vary Judgment (re‑hearing of Appeal) / Re‑hearing / Motion to Vary Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the court should vary its prior judgment to limit the period for which interest runs under a pre‑trial agreement
- 02
Whether the parties to the pre‑trial agreement intended interest to run only until the date of the order for trial judgment and not through the appeal period
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant submitted that the parties intended interest to run only until the date fixed in the pre‑trial agreement for the trial judgment (until August 9, 1982) and that the Court should vary its earlier judgment to reflect that limitation.
- Respondent
- Respondents argued that interest should run beyond the trial judgment date through the appeal period and opposed limiting the interest period by variation of the earlier judgment.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Contract interpretation / pre‑trial agreement principles
Where contract terms and a pre‑trial agreement govern interest, the agreement is interpreted to give effect to the parties' intention as to the period during which interest runs.
- 02
Judicial power to vary judgments on re‑hearing
A superior court has the power on re‑hearing to vary its earlier judgment to correct or clarify the scope of an award, including the period for which interest is awarded.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The application to vary the Court's earlier judgment was allowed because the parties to the pre‑trial agreement had intended interest to run only until the date fixed for the trial judgment (April 14, 1982) and that period should be read as ending on August 9, 1982; accordingly the prior judgment was varied to limit interest to that period.
Court disposition
Application allowed; prior judgment varied on re‑hearing.
- The judgment of the Court pronounced on October 9, 1986 is varied by adding after the words "April 14, 1982" the words "until August 9, 1982".
- There will be no costs on the motion for a re‑hearing or on the re‑hearing.
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Canada · 30 June 1988
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of Canada
Judgment· 30 June 1988
Central Trust Co. v. Rafuse Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1988-06-30 Report [1988] 1 SCR 1206 Case number 17753 Judges Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; McIntyre, William Rogers; Lamer, Antonio; Wilson, Bertha; Le Dain, Gerald Eric On appeal from Canada Subjects Action Notes SCC Case Information: 17753 Decision Content central trust co. v. rafuse, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 1206 Central Trust Company Appellant v. Jack P. Rafuse and Franklyn W. Cordon Respondents indexed as: central trust co. v. rafuse File No.: 17753. Re‑hearing: 1988: June 30. Present: Dickson C.J. and Beetz, McIntyre, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain JJ. application to vary judgment of supreme court of canada Judgments and orders ‑‑ Motion to vary ‑‑ Order as to quantum and interest ‑‑ Interest running from date fixed in pre‑trial agreement ‑‑ Parties to agreement intending interest to run only until date of order for trial judgment and not for appeal period ‑‑ Judgment varied. RE‑HEARING of an appeal, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 147, for the purpose of varying the judgment. Application to vary judgment allowed on re‑hearing. B. A. Crane, Q.C., for the appellant. Reginald Cluney, Q.C., for the respondents. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by I. The Chief Justice‑‑Justice Le Dain will deliver the judgment of the Court. II. Le Dain J.‑‑The application is allowed and the judgment of the Court pronounced on October 9, 1986 is varied by the addition after the words "April 14, 1982" of the words "until August 9, 1982". There will be no costs on the motion for a re‑hearing or on the re‑hearing. Judgment accordingly. Solicitors for the appellant: Daley, Black & Moreira, Halifax. Solicitors for the respondents: McInnes, Cooper & Robertson, Halifax.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.