Moffitt v. Harris
Claim dismissed because claimant failed to prove diminished value with sufficient, non-speculative evidence (no firm plan to sell, dealership testimony and letter were inconclusive), and general damages for emotional upset were not appropriate; therefore no award and no costs.
- Citation
- 2013 NSSM 33
- Parties
- Claimant: PHILLIPPE MELVIN MOFFITT; Defendant: MELVIN HARRIS
- Court
- Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 12 August 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Small Claims Court / Decision Following Hearing
- Outcome
- Claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Diminished Value, Accelerated Depreciation, General Damages for Emotional Upset, Speculative Damages, Insurance Statutory Interpretation
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
PHILLIPPE MELVIN MOFFITT
Claimant
MELVIN HARRIS
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision Following Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether claimant proved diminished value (accelerated depreciation) damages for future loss in resale value
- 2 Whether the December 15, 2011 amendments to the Insurance Act (s.138A) preclude a direct claim between insured parties
- 3 Whether general damages for emotional upset arising from chattel damage are recoverable
Ratio Decidendi
Claim dismissed because claimant failed to prove diminished value with sufficient, non-speculative evidence (no firm plan to sell, dealership testimony and letter were inconclusive), and general damages for emotional upset were not appropriate; therefore no award and no costs.
Court Disposition
Claim dismissed
Orders
- Claim dismissed
- No costs awarded to claimant
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment