Lacaille v. Corporation de Lacaille

Lacaille v. Corporation de Lacaille

The August 28 letter amounted at most to a promise to forbear from suing for fifteen days and did not constitute an agreement extending the maturity of the promissory notes; consequently the action commenced while the notes were already overdue was not premature and judgment for the appellant was proper.

Citation
[1931] SCR 619
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Sem Lacaille; Respondent (defendant): La Corporation De Lacaille
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 June 1931
Procedural Posture
Contract — Promissory Notes / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench (appeal Side), Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the Court of King's Bench set aside; judgment of the Superior Court restored.
Legal Topics
Promissory Note, Maturity, Forbearance, Premature Action, Costs
Source Language
English
Contract Civil Procedure Negotiable Instruments Promissory Note Maturity Forbearance Premature Action Costs

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sem Lacaille

Appellant (plaintiff)

La Corporation De Lacaille

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Contract — Promissory Notes / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench (appeal Side), Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a creditor's letter promising to refrain from suing for 15 days amounted to an extension of the maturity of overdue promissory notes
  2. 2 Whether a promise to forbear without a clear agreement or consideration constitutes a defence to an action on overdue notes
  3. 3 Proper construction of a creditor's communication in relation to rights under negotiable instruments

Ratio Decidendi

The August 28 letter amounted at most to a promise to forbear from suing for fifteen days and did not constitute an agreement extending the maturity of the promissory notes; consequently the action commenced while the notes were already overdue was not premature and judgment for the appellant was proper.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the Court of King's Bench set aside; judgment of the Superior Court restored.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs
  • Judgment of the Court of King's Bench, appeal side, set aside