Crooks v. K & B Electrical & Building Construction Ltd.

Crooks v. K & B Electrical & Building Construction Ltd.

On the balance of probabilities the adjudicator accepted the defendant's evidence that the original written proposal was not accepted as-is and that the parties agreed to a 100 amp service; therefore the defendant was not liable for upgrading to a 200 amp service and the claim was dismissed.

Citation
2009 NSSM 40
Parties
Claimant: Gerald Keith Crooks; Defendant: K & B Electrical & Building Construction Limited; Defendant: Ken Brown - Director / President
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Contract Formation, Performance of Services, Evidence and Recollection, Statute of Limitations
Source Language
English
Contract Construction Limitations Contract Formation Performance of Services Evidence and Recollection Statute of Limitations

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gerald Keith Crooks

Claimant

K & B Electrical & Building Construction Limited

Defendant

Ken Brown - Director / President

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parties contracted for a 200 amp electrical service or a 100 amp service
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is liable to pay for upgrading service to 200 amp
  3. 3 Whether the limitation period bars the claim

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the adjudicator accepted the defendant's evidence that the original written proposal was not accepted as-is and that the parties agreed to a 100 amp service; therefore the defendant was not liable for upgrading to a 200 amp service and the claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed