Dhanna v. Ontario (Ministry of Labour)
The settlement agreement's escrow clause was construed to mean the mortgage would not create an interest in land unless and until default occurred; because there was no default the bank had no interest to assign and post-agreement evidence could not override the agreement's plain terms, therefore the appeal was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2009 ONCA 50
- Parties
- Appellant: Harripaul Dhanna; Respondent: Ontario Ministry of Labour
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 January 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Superior Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Settlement Agreement, Escrow, Mortgage Assignment, Intention of Parties, Priority Dispute, Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Harripaul Dhanna
Appellant
Ontario Ministry of Labour
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Superior Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Meaning and effect of the term "will be held in escrow" in a settlement agreement
- 2 Whether a mortgage created an interest in land prior to a default and thus was assignable
- 3 Admissibility and weight of post-agreement statements and actions to prove parties' intention
Ratio Decidendi
The settlement agreement's escrow clause was construed to mean the mortgage would not create an interest in land unless and until default occurred; because there was no default the bank had no interest to assign and post-agreement evidence could not override the agreement's plain terms, therefore the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Costs fixed at $5,000 inclusive of G.S.T. and disbursements
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Dhanna v. Ontario (Ministry of Labour) Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2009-01-20 Neutral citation 2009 ONCA 50 Docket numbers C49165 Judges Winkler, Warren Keith; Rosenberg, Marc; Moldaver, Michael James Subject Civil Decision Content CITATION: Dhanna v. Ontario (Ministry of Labour), 2009 ONCA 50 DATE: 20090120 DOCKET: C49165 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Winkler C.J.O., Rosenberg and Moldaver JJ.A. BETWEEN: Harripaul Dhanna Applicant (Appellant) and Ontario Ministry of Labour Respondent Gregory M. Sidlofsky, for the appellant Leonard Marsello and Amy Leaman, for the respondent Heard and released orally: January 14, 2009 On appeal from the order of Justice Faye McWatt of the Superior Court of Justice dated July 8, 2008. ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellant concedes that the meaning of the term “will be held in escrow” depends on the intention of the parties at the time the agreement was entered into. The application judge was obviously aware of this test and she relied upon Cromarty J.’s decision in Hunter v. Thoma, [1981] O.J. No. 649 (H.C.J.). [2] The best evidence of the parties’ intention was the terms of the settlement agreement itself. It is apparent that the application judge found that the parties intended that the meaning of the escrow term was that the mortgage would not be effective and would not create an interest in land unless and until there was a default. There never was any default. Accordingly, the bank had nothing to assign to the appellant. The evidence of intention relied upon by the appellant consists of statements and actions taken after the settlement agreement was entered into and when there was a possible priority dispute. [3] Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed with costs fixed at $5,000 inclusive of G.S.T. and disbursements. Signed: “Winkler C.J.O.” “M. Rosenberg J.A.” “M. J. Moldaver J.A.”