Plamondon v. Dionne

Plamondon v. Dionne

Because the respondent had acquired and improved the property for herself (not as a possessor of another's land), art. 417 C.C. does not apply; the appellant's registered title under art. 2098 C.C. prevails over the respondent's unregistered title and the respondent has no right of retention for the asserted improvements; the order granting retention must be removed though accountings for fruits/revenues remain available.

Citation
[1949] SCR 522
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Jean Plamondon; Respondent / Defendant: Regina Dionne
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 June 1949
Procedural Posture
Civil — Property (action Pétitoire) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec (appeal Side)
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; the portion of the lower court judgment granting the respondent a right of retention was removed; appellant declared owner and entitled to possession; parties permitted to account for fruits and revenues.
Legal Topics
Right of Retention, Improvements (impenses), Title Registration and Priority, Art. 417 C.c., Art. 2098 C.c.
Source Language
English
Property Law Civil Law Registration of Real Property Right of Retention Improvements (impenses) Title Registration and Priority Art. 417 C.c. Art. 2098 C.c.

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 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jean Plamondon

Appellant / Plaintiff

Regina Dionne

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil — Property (action Pétitoire) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec (appeal Side)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant had a right of retention for improvements against a subsequent registered purchaser
  2. 2 Whether art. 417 C.C. applies where the party who made improvements was the owner in fact but had not registered title
  3. 3 Effect of art. 2098 C.C. on competing unregistered title versus subsequent registered title

Ratio Decidendi

Because the respondent had acquired and improved the property for herself (not as a possessor of another's land), art. 417 C.C. does not apply; the appellant's registered title under art. 2098 C.C. prevails over the respondent's unregistered title and the respondent has no right of retention for the asserted improvements; the order granting retention must be removed though accountings for fruits/revenues remain available.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; the portion of the lower court judgment granting the respondent a right of retention was removed; appellant declared owner and entitled to possession; parties permitted to account for fruits and revenues.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs.
  • Remove from the judgment the declaration that the respondent has a right of retention for $4,440.38 and related order to withhold possession until repayment.