McKendrick v. FedEx

McKendrick v. FedEx

FedEx was liable for misrepresentation because its service name and public representations reasonably induced reliance that delivery would be next‑day; the limitation of liability on the waybill did not bind the shipper (no adequate notice) or the non‑party receiver; damages were limited to wasted costs caused by the late delivery.

Citation
2017 NSSM 46
Parties
Claimant: Chelsea McKendrick; Defendant: FedEx
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision
Outcome
Claim allowed; FedEx held liable to claimant for misrepresentation and negligent delivery
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Privity of Contract, Limitation of Liability Clauses, Damages, Reliance
Source Language
English

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chelsea McKendrick

Claimant

FedEx

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Decision

  1. 1 Whether FedEx misrepresented its 'Priority Overnight' service
  2. 2 Whether a non‑contracting receiver can recover for misrepresentation/negligence
  3. 3 Whether the limitation of liability on the waybill binds the shipper or the receiver

Ratio Decidendi

FedEx was liable for misrepresentation because its service name and public representations reasonably induced reliance that delivery would be next‑day; the limitation of liability on the waybill did not bind the shipper (no adequate notice) or the non‑party receiver; damages were limited to wasted costs caused by the late delivery.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; FedEx held liable to claimant for misrepresentation and negligent delivery

Orders

  • Defendant FedEx to pay Claimant Chelsea McKendrick CAD 740.36 for costs thrown away resulting from the late delivery