Crann v. Hiscock

Crann v. Hiscock

On the balance of probabilities the Defendants knew or ought to have known the well underperformed and their PCDS statement was misleading; Claimant entitled to recover costs of investigating and replacing the well, reduced by one-third for betterment, resulting in judgment against the Defendants in the amount of $8,167.97 plus $182.94 costs, total $8,350.91.

Citation
2012 NSSM 9
Parties
Claimant: Nancy Louise Crann; Defendant: David Hiscock; Defendant: Beverly Hiscock
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court Real Property/contract Dispute / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant
Legal Topics
Property Condition Disclosure Statement (pcds), Misrepresentation, Disclosure Obligations, Damages for Remedial Work, Betterment, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
English
Real Property Contract Law Misrepresentation Consumer Protection Damages Property Condition Disclosure Statement (pcds) Disclosure Obligations Damages for Remedial Work +2 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nancy Louise Crann

Claimant

David Hiscock

Defendant

Beverly Hiscock

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court Real Property/contract Dispute / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the PCDS contained a misleading statement about the quantity of water from the well
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants knew or ought to have known the well was underperforming (fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation)
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant is entitled to recover costs of drilling a new well and related expenses

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the Defendants knew or ought to have known the well underperformed and their PCDS statement was misleading; Claimant entitled to recover costs of investigating and replacing the well, reduced by one-third for betterment, resulting in judgment against the Defendants in the amount of $8,167.97 plus $182.94 costs, total $8,350.91.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant

Orders

  • Judgment against the Defendants in the amount of $8,167.97 for damages related to replacement of the well
  • Judgment for the Claimant for $182.94 for costs of commencing the claim