MacLean v. LeBlanc

MacLean v. LeBlanc

Claim dismissed because the Defendants, as homeowner sellers who used a project manager, did not owe an implied warranty or contractual obligation for latent defects; the heat pump failure was subject to supplier warranty not a seller's liability, and the Claimant failed to prove the roof leaks were a latent defect existing at the time of sale; caveat emptor applies.

Citation
2014 NSSM 77
Parties
Claimant: David Stewart MacLEAN; Defendant: Gerard LeBlanc; Defendant: Shawna Jones
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Latent Defects, Patent Defects, Caveat Emptor, Property Condition Disclosure, Warranty, Misrepresentation, Home Sale Defects, Heat Pump Failure, Roof Leaks
Source Language
English
Property Law Contract Law Tort Consumer Protection Latent Defects Patent Defects Caveat Emptor Property Condition Disclosure +5 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Stewart MacLEAN

Claimant

Gerard LeBlanc

Defendant

Shawna Jones

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether former owners/sellers can be held liable for latent defects in a home they built and sold
  2. 2 Whether sellers who acted as project managers/general contractors owed an implied warranty or higher standard to purchasers
  3. 3 Whether failure to pass on warranty documentation renders sellers liable

Ratio Decidendi

Claim dismissed because the Defendants, as homeowner sellers who used a project manager, did not owe an implied warranty or contractual obligation for latent defects; the heat pump failure was subject to supplier warranty not a seller's liability, and the Claimant failed to prove the roof leaks were a latent defect existing at the time of sale; caveat emptor applies.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed