Schaffhauser v. Alcorn

Schaffhauser v. Alcorn

The solicitor's contemporaneous letter instructing purchasers to deal directly with the engineers and MacDonald, combined with the agency principle imputing that communication to the vendors, established that the purchasers were authorized to arrange the work and the defendants remained liable for the holdback; therefore the claim for the unpaid balance and costs was allowed.

Citation
2007 NSSM 14
Parties
Claimant: Martin Schaffhauser; Claimant: Krista Haney; Defendant: James Alexander Alcorn; Defendant: Wendy Crawford
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision
Outcome
Claim allowed in amended amount
Legal Topics
Septic System Upgrade, Holdback, Agency, Solicitor Correspondence, Costs
Source Language
English
Contract Property Civil Procedure Evidence Septic System Upgrade Holdback Agency Solicitor Correspondence +1 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin Schaffhauser

Claimant

Krista Haney

Claimant

James Alexander Alcorn

Defendant

Wendy Crawford

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether purchasers or vendors were responsible for arranging and paying for septic system installation
  2. 2 Whether solicitor communications constituted binding direction and imputed knowledge to principals under agency law
  3. 3 Whether the vendor was required to obtain additional quotes beyond the estimate used for the holdback

Ratio Decidendi

The solicitor's contemporaneous letter instructing purchasers to deal directly with the engineers and MacDonald, combined with the agency principle imputing that communication to the vendors, established that the purchasers were authorized to arrange the work and the defendants remained liable for the holdback; therefore the claim for the unpaid balance and costs was allowed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in amended amount

Orders

  • Defendants to pay Claimants debt of $4,795.98
  • Defendants to pay costs of $160.00