Baydar & Associates Inc. v North Atlantic Marine Supply & Services Inc.

Baydar & Associates Inc. v North Atlantic Marine Supply & Services Inc.

Adjudicator found that representatives of the Defendant had actual or ostensible authority and that a binding agreement existed on the Claimant's terms (including obligation to pay for consigned goods after one year and exclusivity), and therefore the Defendant was liable for the outstanding amount; evidentiary credibility of former employees and consistency with the purchase order supported this finding.

Citation
2018 NSSM 3
Parties
Claimant: Baydar & Associates Inc.; Defendant: North Atlantic Marine Supply & Services Inc.
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Judgment for Claimant for $25,199.35
Legal Topics
Consignment, Title to Goods, Ostensible Authority, Oral Agreement, Breach of Contract, Damages, Costs
Source Language
English
Contract Law Commercial Law Property Law Civil Procedure Consignment Title to Goods Ostensible Authority Oral Agreement +3 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Baydar & Associates Inc.

Claimant

North Atlantic Marine Supply & Services Inc.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the consignment arrangement included a binding term obliging the Defendant to purchase the unsold consigned goods after one year
  2. 2 Whether representatives of the Defendant had actual or ostensible authority to bind the Defendant to the alleged terms
  3. 3 Whether title and payment obligation passed to the Defendant or the goods remained the Claimant's property

Ratio Decidendi

Adjudicator found that representatives of the Defendant had actual or ostensible authority and that a binding agreement existed on the Claimant's terms (including obligation to pay for consigned goods after one year and exclusivity), and therefore the Defendant was liable for the outstanding amount; evidentiary credibility of former employees and consistency with the purchase order supported this finding.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Claimant for $25,199.35

Orders

  • Judgment awarded in favour of the Claimant in the amount of $25,199.35 (including costs)
  • No award of prejudgment interest