Gray v. Keitzer

Gray v. Keitzer

There was a valid contract by agency; the claimant had opportunity to inspect and did not rely on actionable representations; no persuasive evidence of misrepresentation, fundamental breach, or breach of statutory implied warranties was proven; accordingly the claimant's remedies fail and the claim is dismissed.

Citation
2005 NSSM 28
Parties
Claimant: Julia Gray; Defendant: John Keizer; Defendant: Keizer's Auto Sales
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Adjudication (judgment)
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Rescission, Breach of Condition, Implied Warranties, Vehicle Sale, Damages
Source Language
English
Contract Law Consumer Protection Sale of Goods Misrepresentation Rescission Breach of Condition Implied Warranties Vehicle Sale +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 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julia Gray

Claimant

John Keizer

Defendant

Keizer's Auto Sales

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Adjudication (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was there a valid contract between the parties?
  2. 2 If no contract what remedies exist?
  3. 3 What conditions and warranties were contained in the contract and was there a breach?

Ratio Decidendi

There was a valid contract by agency; the claimant had opportunity to inspect and did not rely on actionable representations; no persuasive evidence of misrepresentation, fundamental breach, or breach of statutory implied warranties was proven; accordingly the claimant's remedies fail and the claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • No order as to costs