Beaver Specialty Ltd. v. Donald H. Bain Ltd.

Beaver Specialty Ltd. v. Donald H. Bain Ltd.

The contract, read with contemporaneous documents and circumstances, evidenced an intention that delivery be f.o.b. Toronto so title did not pass before arrival; therefore s.33(1) applied, Beaver had no reasonable opportunity to examine and had not accepted the goods, so Beaver was justified in refusing them; Bain's remedy was against the carrier and the trial judge's award against PIX was restored.

Citation
[1974] SCR 903
Parties
Appellant; Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim and Defendant by Counterclaim: Beaver Specialty Limited; Respondent; Plaintiff; Defendant by Counterclaim: Donald H. Bain Limited; Respondent; Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim and Defendant by Counterclaim: Pacific Inland Express Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 August 1973
Procedural Posture
Sale of Goods Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal of Beaver allowed and trial judge's judgment restored; appeal of Pacific Inland Express dismissed; Bain's appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Transfer of Property, Acceptance of Goods, F.o.b. Interpretation, Carrier Liability, Statutory Inspection Rights (s.33)
Source Language
English
Sale of Goods Carriage of Goods Contract Law Transfer of Property Acceptance of Goods F.o.b. Interpretation Carrier Liability Statutory Inspection Rights (s.33)

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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Beaver Specialty Limited

Appellant; Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim and Defendant by Counterclaim

Donald H. Bain Limited

Respondent; Plaintiff; Defendant by Counterclaim

Pacific Inland Express Limited

Respondent; Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim and Defendant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Sale of Goods Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether property in the walnuts passed to the buyer when delivered to the carrier in Vancouver or on delivery f.o.b. Toronto
  2. 2 Whether buyer was deemed to have accepted goods under s.33(1) of the Sale of Goods Act
  3. 3 Whether carrier was liable for damage in transit and consequent losses

Ratio Decidendi

The contract, read with contemporaneous documents and circumstances, evidenced an intention that delivery be f.o.b. Toronto so title did not pass before arrival; therefore s.33(1) applied, Beaver had no reasonable opportunity to examine and had not accepted the goods, so Beaver was justified in refusing them; Bain's remedy was against the carrier and the trial judge's award against PIX was restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal of Beaver allowed and trial judge's judgment restored; appeal of Pacific Inland Express dismissed; Bain's appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • Beaver's appeal allowed
  • Bain's claim against Beaver dismissed