Maheux v. McDonald

Maheux v. McDonald

The claim is dismissed because the claimant failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, the alleged breaches or the quantum of damages; photographic evidence and oral testimony were insufficient and no expert or foundational evidence supported the claimed costs.

Citation
2010 NSSM 20
Parties
Claimant: RICHARD MAHEUX; Defendant: Ryan McDonald
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court Claim / Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed with no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Damages, Trespass, Failure to Complete Work, Cost Recovery, Evidence and Expert Proof
Source Language
English
Contract Property Tort Civil Procedure Breach of Contract Damages Trespass Failure to Complete Work +2 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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RICHARD MAHEUX

Claimant

Ryan McDonald

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court Claim / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the written contract
  2. 2 Whether the claimant proved defective workmanship and resulting damages
  3. 3 Whether the defendant trespassed/encroached on neighbour's property

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is dismissed because the claimant failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, the alleged breaches or the quantum of damages; photographic evidence and oral testimony were insufficient and no expert or foundational evidence supported the claimed costs.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed with no order as to costs.