Lebrun v. Gruninger

Lebrun v. Gruninger

The Court held the appellant's unilateral notation of cancellation did not discharge the binding contract; the agreement remained enforceable and the appellant was liable, so the appeal was dismissed and the respondent's rights upheld.

Citation
(1918) 59 SCR 687
Parties
Respondent: Lebrun; Appellant: Gruninger
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 June 1918
Procedural Posture
Contract Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Transfer of Shares, Cancellation of Contract
Source Language
English
Contract Equity Specific Performance Transfer of Shares Cancellation of Contract

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lebrun

Respondent

Gruninger

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Contract Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant validly cancelled the contract by unilateral notation
  2. 2 Whether specific performance is an appropriate remedy for contract to transfer shares especially where control of a company is implicated
  3. 3 Legal effect of a notarial protest in enforcing contractual obligations

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the appellant's unilateral notation of cancellation did not discharge the binding contract; the agreement remained enforceable and the appellant was liable, so the appeal was dismissed and the respondent's rights upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Respondent's action maintained; trial judgment for $5,000 (with interest and costs) affirmed subject to the modifications previously made by the Court of King's Bench.