Ampex of Canada Ltd. v. Thomson and Thomson, (1979) 33 A.R. 260 (QB)

• Judge: Moshansky, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: December 20, 1979
• Citations: (1979), 33 A.R. 260 (QB)

Ampex v. Thomson (1979), 33 A.R. 260 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Ampex of Canada Limited v. Thomson and Thomson

(Q.B. 138109)

Indexed As: Ampex of Canada Ltd. v. Thomson and Thomson

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Calgary

Moshansky, J.

December 20, 1979.

Summary:

The defendants, husband and wife, guaranteed the performance of a company to which the plaintiff supplied goods. The company went into receivership and the plaintiff brought an action on the guarantee.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the guarantee complied with the Guarantees Acknowledgment Act, R.S.A. 1970, c. 163 and allowed the action against the husband. The court, finding that the wife did not understand the nature of the document or that it rendered her personally liable, applied the doctrine of non est factum and dismissed the action against her.

Guarantee and Indemnity - Topic 124

The contract - Formation of contract - Non est factum - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the defence of non est factum applied to a guarantor, who did not understand the nature of the document or that it rendered her personally liable - See paragraphs 23 to 25.

Guarantee and Indemnity - Topic 178

The contract - Form - Signatures - Acknowledgment of - Exemptions - Guarantees Acknowledgment Act, R.S.A. 1970, c. 163 - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that s. 2(a)(iv)(V) of the Guarantees Acknowledgment Act merely provides that, in the circumstances described, a guarantee is exempted from the requirements of the Act as to a guarantor's appearance before a notary public, etc., but such a guarantee is still valid and may be sued upon - See paragraphs 15 to 17.

Cases Noticed:

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company of Canada Ltd. v. Knight & Kunzil & Russill (1960-61), 33 W.W.R.(N.S.) 287, consd. [para. 18].

Crown Lumber v. Engel (1961-62), 36 W.W.R.(N.S.) 128, consd. [para. 20].

British Westinghouse Company v. Underground Railway, [1912] A.C. 673, appld. [para. 28].

Bancode Portugal v. Waterloo & Sons Ltd., [1932] A.C. 452, appld. [para. 29].

Statutes Noticed:

Guarantees Acknowledgment Act, R.S.A. 1970, c. 163 [para. 7]; sect. 2(a)(iv)(B) [paras. 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21].

Authors and Works Noticed:

McGregor, The Law of Damages (13th Ed.), pp. 227-232 [para. 28].

Counsel:

G.N. McDermid, for the plaintiff;

J.A. Butlin, for the defendants.

This case was heard before, MOSHANSKY, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Calgary, who delivered the following judgment on December 20, 1979.