Développement Central Ville De L’isle Inc. v. Leibovitch et al.

Développement Central Ville De L’isle Inc. v. Leibovitch et al.

Article 1040a of the Civil Code is limited to corporeal immoveables and does not require a sixty‑day notice where the secured right is an incorporeal debt transferred as security; additionally, respondents' $80,000 claim was not extinguished by compensation because they did not become personally liable for the larger debt—therefore the trial and appeal courts' declarations cancelling appellant's right to redeem were upheld.

Citation
[1967] SCR 603
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Développement Central Ville De L’isle Inc.; Respondent (plaintiff): Sidney Leibovitch; Respondent (plaintiff): Edward Leibovitch; Mise En Cause: Développement Plateau LaSalle Ltée
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 June 1967
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench, Province of Quebec; Judgment on Appeal Affirmed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment below affirmed.
Legal Topics
Hypothec, Transfer of Debt, Right of Redemption, Incorporeal Property, Statutory Notice, Civil Code Article 1040a
Source Language
English
Contract Hypothec Transfer of Debt Right of Redemption Incorporeal Property Statutory Notice Civil Code Article 1040a

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Développement Central Ville De L’isle Inc.

Appellant (defendant)

Sidney Leibovitch

Respondent (plaintiff)

Edward Leibovitch

Respondent (plaintiff)

Développement Plateau LaSalle Ltée

Mise En Cause

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench, Province of Quebec; Judgment on Appeal Affirmed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether article 1040a of the Civil Code requires a 60-day notice before a creditor may become absolute owner of rights transferred as security (incorporeal property)
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' $80,000 claim was extinguished by compensation when respondents obtained ownership of the hypothecated immoveable
  3. 3 Whether the appellant lost its right to redeem under the deed of loan

Ratio Decidendi

Article 1040a of the Civil Code is limited to corporeal immoveables and does not require a sixty‑day notice where the secured right is an incorporeal debt transferred as security; additionally, respondents' $80,000 claim was not extinguished by compensation because they did not become personally liable for the larger debt—therefore the trial and appeal courts' declarations cancelling appellant's right to redeem were upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment below affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment of Superior Court and Court of Queen's Bench declaring cancelled and annulled appellant's right to redeem the sum of $798,269.97 is maintained.