32262 B.C. Ltd. v., (1998) 216 A.R. 33 (CA)
Judge | Hetherington, O'Leary and Hunt, JJ.A. |
Court | Court of Appeal (Alberta) |
Case Date | March 26, 1998 |
Citations | (1998), 216 A.R. 33 (CA) |
32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical (1998), 216 A.R. 33 (CA);
175 W.A.C. 33
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [1998] A.R. TBEd. AP.012
32262 B.C. Ltd.
(appellant/respondent by cross-appeal)
v. See-Rite Optical Ltd. and
Richard Crockett
(respondents/appellants by cross-appeal)
(9603-0074-AC)
Indexed As: 32262 B.C. Ltd. v.
See-Rite Optical Ltd. et al.
Alberta Court of Appeal
Hetherington, O'Leary and
Hunt, JJ.A.
March 26, 1998.
Summary:
See-Rite renewed a lease for a sign from the plaintiff for 77 months. See-Rite made payments until April 1991 when it requested the plaintiff to remove the sign. The plaintiff removed the sign and requested See-Rite to remit, pursuant to clause 24 of the lease, the remaining 70 monthly payments. See-Rite failed to make the further payments. The plaintiff sued See-Rite for, inter alia, prospective damages.
The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision not reported in this series of reports, held, inter alia, that clause 24 was a penalty clause and therefore, unenforceable. The court calculated the damages. The plaintiff appealed. See-Rite cross-appealed.
The Alberta Court of Appeal, O'Leary, J.A., dissenting in part, allowed the appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal.
Contracts - Topic 4046
Remedies for breach - Liquidated damages and penalties - Whether deposit or amount specified is a penalty or liquidated damages - See-Rite renewed a lease for a sign from the plaintiff - The lease, clause 24, provided that, upon breach of the lease by See-Rite, the remaining rental payments for the balance of the term were payable as liquidated damages - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that clause 24 was enforceable - It was a genuine pre-estimate of damages and was not a penalty clause - See paragraphs 5 to 18.
Personal Property - Topic 4202
Rental agreements - General - Display signs - [See Contracts - Topic 4046 ].
Personal Property - Topic 4324
Rental agreements - Breach by lessee - Action for balance - [See Contracts - Topic 4046 ].
Personal Property - Topic 4367
Rental agreements - Rent - Payment of - Where lessee repudiates lease - [See Contracts - Topic 4046 ].
Cases Noticed:
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. v. New Garage and Motor Co., [1915] A.C. 79, refd to. [para. 12].
Thermidaire Corp. v. H.F. Clarke Ltd. (1974), 3 N.R. 133; 54 D.L.R.(3d) 385 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 13].
J.G. Collins Insurance Agencies Ltd. v. Elsley et al., [1978] 2 S.C.R. 916; 20 N.R. 1; 83 D.L.R.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 13].
Alwest Neon Signs Ltd. v. Henze (1989), 105 A.R. 343 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].
32262 B.C. Ltd. v. Thomas (N.R.) Professional Corp. et al. (1995), 170 A.R. 161 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 14].
Keneric Tractor Sales Ltd. v. Langille, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 440; 79 N.R. 241; 82 N.S.R.(2d) 361; 207 A.P.R. 361; 43 D.L.R.(4th) 171, refd to. [para. 16].
Highway Properties Ltd. v. Kelly, Douglas & Co., [1971] S.C.R. 562; [1972] 2 W.W.R. 28; 17 D.L.R.(3d) 710, refd to. [para. 20].
Goldhar v. Universal Sections and Mouldings Ltd., [1963] 1 O.R. 189; 36 D.L.R.(2d) 450 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].
Blue Chip Investments Inc. v. Hicks (1985), 54 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 260; 160 A.P.R. 260; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 755 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].
North Bay T.V. & Auto Ltd. v. Nova Electronics Ltd. et al. (1984), 12 D.L.R.(4th) 767n; 47 O.R.(2d) 588n (C.A.), affing. 4 D.L.R.(4th) 88; 44 O.R.(2d) 342; 30 R.P.R. 169 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 23].
Deerfoot Mall (Calgary) Ltd. v. Dalmont Enterprises (1987), 77 A.R. 204; 37 D.L.R.(4th) 429 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].
Sign-O-Lite Signs Ltd. v. Windsor Plywood (Kelowna) Ltd. (1988), 88 A.R. 301; 61 Alta. L.R.(2d) 21 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 27].
32262 B.C. Ltd. (c.o.b. Wallace Neon) v. Goldstein, [1993] B.C.J. No. 2707 (B.C. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 48].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Bridge, M.C., Damages for Breach of Hiring Agreements (1987), 3 B.F.L.R. 344, generally [para. 43].
Snell, Principles of Equity (27th Ed. 1973), p. 535 [para. 13].
Waddams, S., The Law of Damages (1996), pp. 8-7 to 8-9 [para. 15].
Counsel:
R.A. Beeken, for the appellant/respondent by cross-appeal;
E.W. Onusko, for the respondent/appellant by cross-appeal, See-Rite;
B.R. King, for the respondent, Crockett.
This appeal was heard before Hetherington, O'Leary and Hunt, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered on March 26, 1998, and the following opinion were filed:
Hunt, J.A., Hetherington, J.A., concurring - see paragraphs 1 to 38;
O'Leary, J.A., dissenting in part - see paragraphs 39 to 49.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Table of cases
...25 OR (2d) 79, 10 RPR 257 (CA) ..........................................................476, 477 32262 BC Ltd v See-Rite Optical Ltd (1998), 216 AR 33, 39 BLR (2d) 102, [1998] AJ No 312 (CA) .................................................... 529 376599 Alberta Inc v Tanshaw Products Inc ......
-
Table of Cases
...R.P.R. 257 (C.A.) ................................................................. 413– 14 32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical Ltd. (1998), 216 A.R. 33, 39 B.L.R. (2d) 102, [1998] A.J. No. 312 (C.A.) ............................................................ 460 376599 Alberta Inc. v. Ta......
-
Galaxy Sports Inc. (Re), (2004) 200 B.C.A.C. 184 (CA)
...361; 207 A.P.R. 361; 43 D.L.R.(3d) 171, refd to. [para. 43]. 32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical Ltd. et al., [1998] 9 W.W.R. 442; 216 A.R. 33; 175 W.A.C. 33 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Eftaxias, Re (1962), 3 C.B.R.(N.S.) 152 (Que. Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 44]. B.C. Boat Sales Ltd., Re; Casso......
-
Judicial Oversight of Remedy Stipulation
...to be a penalty clause, but was nevertheless held to be enforceable. 32 McKeen , above note 10. 33 32262 BC Ltd v See-Rite Optical Ltd (1998), 216 AR 33 (CA); MTK , above note 14; Global Entertainment v Yeo (2005), 7 BLR (4th) 213 (Alta Prov Ct); Canadian Linen and Uniform Service Co v ABC ......
-
Galaxy Sports Inc. (Re), (2004) 200 B.C.A.C. 184 (CA)
...361; 207 A.P.R. 361; 43 D.L.R.(3d) 171, refd to. [para. 43]. 32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical Ltd. et al., [1998] 9 W.W.R. 442; 216 A.R. 33; 175 W.A.C. 33 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Eftaxias, Re (1962), 3 C.B.R.(N.S.) 152 (Que. Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 44]. B.C. Boat Sales Ltd., Re; Casso......
-
National Bank of Canada et al. v. Merit Energy Ltd. et al., 2001 ABQB 680
...1 (C.A.), affd. [1987] 2 S.C.R. 757; 80 N.R. 394; 82 A.R. 395, refd to. [para. 33, footnote 13]. 32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical (1998), 216 A.R. 33; 175 W.A.C. 33 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33, footnote Frances R. Dearlove (Bennett Jones LLP), for Arthur Andersen Inc.; Jeffrey D. Vallis a......
-
Anstead v. Park Royal Homes Inc., (2009) 470 A.R. 124 (QB)
...affecting (incl. bad faith) - [See Damage Awards - Topic 2014 ]. Cases Noticed: 32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical Ltd. et al. (1998), 216 A.R. 33; 175 W.A.C. 33; 1998 ABCA 89, refd to. [para. Cain v. Clarica Life Insurance Co. (2005), 384 A.R. 11; 367 W.A.C. 11; 2005 ABCA 437, appld. [par......
-
MTK Auto West Ltd. v. Allen, 2003 BCSC 1613
...[para. 20]. Dimensional Investments Ltd. v. Canada, [1968] S.C.R. 93, refd to. [para. 21]. 32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical Ltd. (1998), 216 A.R. 33; 175 W.A.C. 33 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Edmonton (City) v. Triple Five Corp. (1994), 158 A.R. 293 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 23]. Ashland Scurl......
-
Table of Cases
...R.P.R. 257 (C.A.) ................................................................. 413– 14 32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical Ltd. (1998), 216 A.R. 33, 39 B.L.R. (2d) 102, [1998] A.J. No. 312 (C.A.) ............................................................ 460 376599 Alberta Inc. v. Ta......
-
Table of cases
...25 OR (2d) 79, 10 RPR 257 (CA) ..........................................................476, 477 32262 BC Ltd v See-Rite Optical Ltd (1998), 216 AR 33, 39 BLR (2d) 102, [1998] AJ No 312 (CA) .................................................... 529 376599 Alberta Inc v Tanshaw Products Inc ......
-
Judicial Oversight of Remedy Stipulation
...to be a penalty clause, but was nevertheless held to be enforceable. 32 McKeen , above note 10. 33 32262 BC Ltd v See-Rite Optical Ltd (1998), 216 AR 33 (CA); MTK , above note 14; Global Entertainment v Yeo (2005), 7 BLR (4th) 213 (Alta Prov Ct); Canadian Linen and Uniform Service Co v ABC ......
-
Judicial Oversight of Remedy Stipulation
...respondents was found to be a penalty clause, but was nevertheless held to be enforceable. 28 32262 B.C. Ltd. v. See-Rite Optical Ltd. (1998), 216 A.R. 33 (C.A.); MTK , ibid. ; Global Entertainment v. Yeo (2005), 7 B.L.R. (4th) 213 (Alta. Prov. Ct.). 29 [2005] O.J. No. 3407 (S.C.J.). See al......