Cornish v. Howe

Cornish v. Howe

Defendant breached by excavation and owed to restore claimant's fence, but restoration need only be a reasonable, workmanlike replacement; because the replacement fence was workmanlike and the defendant validly revoked any licence to use a gate, claimant was not entitled to the requested $1,800 or to reinstatement...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2008 NSSM 42
Parties
Claimant: Charles Cornish; Defendant: Mark Howe; Defendant: Mark Howe Produce (d.b.a. Dave's Fruit & Vegetable)
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision (hearing Held July 29, 2008; Rendered August 1, 2008)
Outcome
Claim dismissed; no damages awarded; no costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Damage to Property, Measure of Damages, Mitigation of Damages, Licence to Enter Land
Source Language
english
Property Tort Trespass Damage to Property Measure of Damages Mitigation of Damages Licence to Enter Land

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Cornish

Claimant

Mark Howe

Defendant

Mark Howe Produce (d.b.a. Dave's Fruit & Vegetable)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Decision (hearing Held July 29, 2008; Rendered August 1, 2008)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant was obligated to restore claimant's fence to its exact previous condition or only to a reasonable facsimile
  2. 2 Whether defendant was required to reinstall a gate given revocation of licence to enter
  3. 3 Whether the replacement fence was defective and whether claimant mitigated damages

Ratio Decidendi

Defendant breached by excavation and owed to restore claimant's fence, but restoration need only be a reasonable, workmanlike replacement; because the replacement fence was workmanlike and the defendant validly revoked any licence to use a gate, claimant was not entitled to the requested $1,800 or to reinstatement of a gate, and the claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; no damages awarded; no costs awarded.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • No damages awarded to the claimant