Osborne v. Pavlick et al.

Osborne v. Pavlick et al.

The male appellant was liable because he and his wife agreed to a common course of action to sell both the real property and the business; he knew or must have known the business representations were false, remained silent while his wife made the misrepresentations, permitted her to act as his agent in the negotiations, and thereby became a joint tortfeasor responsible for the deceit; the appeal was dismissed and the trial award and costs were upheld.

Citation
2000 BCCA 120
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Dorothy Osborne; Plaintiff/respondent: Harvey Alfred Osborne; Defendant/appellant: Ann Marie Pavlick (by the Public Trustee for the Province of British Columbia, as Guardian ad Litem); Defendant/appellant: Leon Edward Pavlick
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Arising From Tort of Deceit (fraud) and Related Contract Disputes / Appeal to the British Columbia Court of Appeal From Trial Judgment on Liability and Damages
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; trial judgment against appellants affirmed
Legal Topics
Deceit (fraudulent Misrepresentation), Joint Tortfeasors, Silence as Misrepresentation, Agency and Principal Liability, Spousal Liability, Damages Vs Rescission
Source Language
English
Torts Fraud Contract Property Law Agency Deceit (fraudulent Misrepresentation) Joint Tortfeasors Silence as Misrepresentation +3 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dorothy Osborne

Plaintiff/respondent

Harvey Alfred Osborne

Plaintiff/respondent

Ann Marie Pavlick (by the Public Trustee for the Province of British Columbia, as Guardian ad Litem)

Defendant/appellant

Leon Edward Pavlick

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Arising From Tort of Deceit (fraud) and Related Contract Disputes / Appeal to the British Columbia Court of Appeal From Trial Judgment on Liability and Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the male appellant could be held liable for fraudulent misrepresentations made by the female appellant although he did not personally make the representations
  2. 2 Whether silence or acquiescence by the male appellant in the course of a joint sale constituted fraudulent misrepresentation or rendered him a joint tortfeasor
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings and trial findings supported liability of the male appellant

Ratio Decidendi

The male appellant was liable because he and his wife agreed to a common course of action to sell both the real property and the business; he knew or must have known the business representations were false, remained silent while his wife made the misrepresentations, permitted her to act as his agent in the negotiations, and thereby became a joint tortfeasor responsible for the deceit; the appeal was dismissed and the trial award and costs were upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; trial judgment against appellants affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed by the Court of Appeal
  • Trial order affirmed: Defendants Ann Marie Pavlick and Leon Edward Pavlick jointly and severally pay Plaintiffs Dorothy Osborne and Harvey Alfred Osborne CAD 112839.99