King v. Haddad

King v. Haddad

The agreement between King and Haddad was expressly conditional on the landlord's consent to assign the lease (a condition precedent). The landlord's independent refusal made performance impossible and therefore Haddad did not breach or misrepresent; additionally, the Small Claims Court is statutorily precluded from awarding legal fees, so King's claim for legal costs fails.

Citation
2009 NSSM 63
Parties
Claimant: Finwick George King; Defendant: Walid Haddad
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Final Decision (adjudication)
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Condition Precedent, Misrepresentation, Assignment of Lease, Damages, Costs
Source Language
English

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Finwick George King

Claimant

Walid Haddad

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Final Decision (adjudication)

  1. 1 Whether a binding enforceable contract existed between King and Haddad
  2. 2 Whether Haddad breached the agreement or misrepresented the situation
  3. 3 Whether Haddad is liable for claimant's legal fees for preparing the purchase agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement between King and Haddad was expressly conditional on the landlord's consent to assign the lease (a condition precedent). The landlord's independent refusal made performance impossible and therefore Haddad did not breach or misrepresent; additionally, the Small Claims Court is statutorily precluded from awarding legal fees, so King's claim for legal costs fails.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • No legal fees awarded to claimant pursuant to Small Claims Court Act s.29(1)(b) and Regulation 15(2)