Tetrault and Lussier v. Gagnon

Tetrault and Lussier v. Gagnon

The agreement was a commutative (onerous) contract rather than a donation because the common intention at execution and the reciprocal obligations created equivalent prestations; the donor's unexpected death shortly after signing does not transform the nature of the contract into a donation, so the executors must effect passation of titles.

Citation
[1962] SCR 766
Parties
Defendants Appellants (executors Testamentary): Réjean Tétreault and Léo Lussier; Plaintiff Respondent: Maurice Gagnon
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 June 1962
Procedural Posture
Contract / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Quebec Court of Queen's Bench (appeal Side)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Donation Vs Commutative Contract, Right of Habitation, Registration of Deeds, Animus Donandi, Onerous Contract, Promise of Sale Deferred Until Death, Specific Performance/passation of Titles
Source Language
English
Contract Property Succession Civil Procedure Donation Vs Commutative Contract Right of Habitation Registration of Deeds Animus Donandi +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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Réjean Tétreault and Léo Lussier

Defendants Appellants (executors Testamentary)

Maurice Gagnon

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contract / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Quebec Court of Queen's Bench (appeal Side)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1 September 1955 agreement was a donation inter vivos (void for want of registration) or an onerous/commutative contract enforceable against executors
  2. 2 Whether there was animus donandi (intention to make a gratuitous gift)
  3. 3 Whether the obligations assumed by the beneficiaries amounted to equivalent consideration such that the agreement was commutative despite the donor's sudden death

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement was a commutative (onerous) contract rather than a donation because the common intention at execution and the reciprocal obligations created equivalent prestations; the donor's unexpected death shortly after signing does not transform the nature of the contract into a donation, so the executors must effect passation of titles.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Appellants ordered to pass titles to respondent in accordance with the agreement