Bowser v. Prager,
| Jurisdiction | Ontario |
| Judge | Weekes, J. |
| Citation | (1999), 95 O.T.C. 302 (SC) |
| Court | Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada) |
| Date | 16 April 1999 |
Bowser v. Prager (1999), 95 O.T.C. 302 (SC)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [1999] O.T.C. TBEd. MY.004
Gregory Allan Bowser (plaintiff) v. Karl Prager (defendant)
(257-97)
Indexed As: Bowser v. Prager
Court of Ontario
Superior Court of Justice
Bracebridge
Weekes, J.
April 22, 1999.
Summary:
The plaintiff commenced an action for specific performance of an agreement of purchase and sale of a home. The defendant argued that he was mentally incompetent at the time of the transaction.
The Ontario Superior Court held that while the defendant was depressed at the time he entered the agreement, he was not so mentally incapacitated that he should be entitled to avoid the agreement. The court held, however, that specific performance would not be awarded because to do so would create undue hardship for the defendant. The court held that it was appropriate to award damages in lieu of specific performance.
Contracts - Topic 754
Parties - Capacity - Persons of unsound mind and drunkards - Depression - See paragraphs 1 to 16.
Contracts - Topic 4110
Remedies for breach - Specific performance - Sale of land - See paragraphs 1 to 16.
Family Law - Topic 635
Husband and wife - Marital property - Matrimonial home - Disposition of - Consent of spouse - See paragraphs 24 and 25.
Sale of Land - Topic 1119
The contract - Parties - Husband and wife - Consent of spouse - General - See paragraphs 24 and 25.
Sale of Land - Topic 8551
Remedies of purchaser - Specific performance - When available - See paragraphs 1 to 16.
Sale of Land - Topic 8755
Remedies of purchaser - Damages - In lieu or specific performance - See paragraphs 1 to 16.
Cases Noticed:
1110049 Ontario Ltd. v. Exclusive Diamonds Inc. et al. (1995), 83 O.A.C. 391; 25 O.R.(3d) 417 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].
Statutes Noticed:
Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F-3, sect. 21(1) [para. 24]; sect. 21(2) [para. 25].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Sharpe, Robert S., Injunctions and Specific Performance (1988), para. 10.370 [para. 14].
Waddams, The Law of Contracts (3rd Ed.), para. 651 [para. 10].
Counsel:
N.B. Roche, for the plaintiff;
Hugh A. Taylor, for the defendant.
This case was heard on March 2, 4, 12 and April 16, 1999, before Weekes, J., of the Ontario Superior Court, who delivered the following decision on April 22, 1999.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Table of Cases
...1 W.L.R. 1120, [1972] 3 All E.R. 349, 116 Sol. J. 644 (Ch.) ................................................. 429 Bowser v. Prager (1999), 95 O.T.C. 302, [1999] O.J. No. 1438 (S.C.J.) .......................................................... 335–36, 338 Table of Cases 531 Boyce v. Paddingt......
-
Table of cases
...[1972] 1 WLR 1120, [1972] 3 All ER 349, 116 Sol J 644 (Ch) ...................................................... 592 Bowser v Prager (1999), 95 OTC 302, [1999] OJ No 1438 (SCJ) ............... 469, 472 Boyce v Paddington Borough Council, [1903] 1 Ch 109, 87 LT 564, 72 LJ Ch 28, rev’d [1903......
-
Table of cases
...[1972] 1 WLR 1120, [1972] 3 All ER 349, 116 Sol J 644 (Ch) ...................................................... 592 Bowser v Prager (1999), 95 OTC 302, [1999] OJ No 1438 (SCJ) ............... 469, 472 Boyce v Paddington Borough Council, [1903] 1 Ch 109, 87 LT 564, 72 LJ Ch 28, rev’d [1903......
-
Table of Cases
...1 W.L.R. 1120, [1972] 3 All E.R. 349, 116 Sol. J. 644 (Ch.) ................................................. 429 Bowser v. Prager (1999), 95 O.T.C. 302, [1999] O.J. No. 1438 (S.C.J.) .......................................................... 335–36, 338 Table of Cases 531 Boyce v. Paddingt......