Reported as: 2018 SKPC 40
Docket Number: PC17135 , 608/17 JCS
Court: Provincial Court
- Contract Law � Breach
Digest: The plaintiff claimed two sums outstanding from the defendant, a cash loan of $1,800 and an unauthorized Visa charge of $629. The defendant denied that the loan was advanced and claimed that the Visa transaction had been authorized by the plaintiff but he arranged with the credit card company to reverse the charge, so that there was no claim. Further, she argued that the plaintiff was statute-barred from pursuing any indebtedness against her by virtue of The Limitations Act.
HELD: The action was dismissed. The court found that although the plaintiff had proven that the loan had been advanced, the claim was issued beyond the two-year limitation period set out in the Act. As there was evidence from the merchant that she had not received the benefit of any Visa payment by the plaintiff, no liability attached to the defendant in the circumstances. The court awarded costs to the plaintiff pursuant to s. 36(3)(e) of The Small Claims Act, 2016 because the defendant provided patently false evidence respecting the transaction. The amount awarded was $249, being 10 percent of the total amount claimed, as prescribed under s. 6(3)(b) of The Small Claims Regulations.
- Limitations Act, SS 2004, c L-16.1, s 5
- Limitations Act, SS 2004, c L-16.1, s 10
- Small Claims Act, 2016, SS 2016, c S-50.12, s 36
- Small Claims Act, 2016...