Fancy v. Midtown Construction

Fancy v. Midtown Construction

The Claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the Defendant breached the contract or negligently caused the alleged $12,000 damage because the evidence was speculative, the claimant lacked expert or witness testimony to establish causation and quantum, and the claimant had signed a confirmation that work was completed and satisfactory, so the claim is dismissed.

Citation
2017 NSSM 11
Parties
Claimant: MURRAY FANCY; Defendant: MIDTOWN CONSTRUCTION
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision (adjudication)
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Damages, Causation, Evidence, Remedies
Source Language
English
Contract Law Tort (negligence) Construction Law Breach of Contract Damages Causation Evidence Remedies

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MURRAY FANCY

Claimant

MIDTOWN CONSTRUCTION

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Decision (adjudication)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant breached the roofing contract by failing to perform required work
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's conduct caused the Claimant's alleged consequential property damage
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant has met the burden of proof on causation and quantum of damages

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the Defendant breached the contract or negligently caused the alleged $12,000 damage because the evidence was speculative, the claimant lacked expert or witness testimony to establish causation and quantum, and the claimant had signed a confirmation that work was completed and satisfactory, so the claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed; no damages awarded