Henderson v. Knogler, (2010) 362 Sask.R. 118 (CA)

• Judge: Lane, Smith and Ottenbreit, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: September 27, 2010
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2010), 362 Sask.R. 118 (CA);2010 SKCA 119

Henderson v. Knogler (2010), 362 Sask.R. 118 (CA);

    500 W.A.C. 118

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2010] Sask.R. TBEd. OC.004

Eric Knogler and Teresa Knogler (appellants) v. Ardel Henderson (respondent)

(1752; 2010 SKCA 119)

Indexed As: Henderson v. Knogler

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Lane, Smith and Ottenbreit, JJ.A.

September 27, 2010.

Summary:

The vendor owned a lakefront lot (Lot C). As per a proposed subdivision plan, he intended to subdivide Lot C into little Lot C and Lot K. He sold Lot C to the purchasers. The legal description in the purchase and sale contract mistakenly described the original Lot C, rather than little Lot C. The vendor sought rectification of the contract. The purchasers submitted that they agreed to purchase a lot larger than little Lot C, but admittedly smaller than the original Lot C. The purchasers argued that there was no consensus ad idem and the vendor's remedy for mutual mistake was rescission or a declaration that the contract was void, not rectification.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, in a judgment reported (2009), 330 Sask.R. 256, held that the vendor was entitled to rectification. The court accepted that the purchasers were shown the proposed subdivision plan, to be registered concurrently with their deed, and knew that they were purchasing little Lot C, not some bigger lot. The purchasers appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Deeds and Documents - Topic 5057

Rectification - When available - Mistake - Mutual - [See Deeds and Documents - Topic 5059 ].

Deeds and Documents - Topic 5059

Rectification - When available - Mistake - Common - The vendor owned a lakefront lot (Lot C) - As per a proposed subdivision plan to be registered, Lot C was to be subdivided into little Lot C and Lot K, with little Lot C sold to the purchasers - The vendor's lawyer neglected to register the subdivision plan - The legal description in the purchase and sale contract mistakenly described the original Lot C, rather than little Lot C - The vendor sought rectification of the contract - The purchasers submitted that they agreed to purchase a lot larger than little Lot C, but admittedly smaller than the original Lot C - The purchasers argued that there was no consensus ad idem and the vendor's remedy for mutual mistake was rescission or a declaration that the contract was void, not rectification - The trial judge held that the vendor was entitled to rectification - The purchasers were shown the proposed subdivision plan, which was to be registered concurrently with their deed - They knew that they were purchasing little Lot C, not some bigger lot - This was a common mistake (both parties under same mistake), leading to rectification, rather than a mutual mistake (parties under differing mistakes) which would lead to rescission or a void contract for lack of consensus ad idem - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the purchasers' appeal - The evidence clearly supported the trial judge's findings.

Cases Noticed:

Sylvan Lake Golf & Tennis Club Ltd. v. Performance Industries Ltd. and O'Connor (No. 2), [2002] 1 S.C.R. 678; 283 N.R. 233; 299 A.R. 201; 266 W.A.C. 201; 2002 SCC 19, refd to. [para. 9].

Counsel:

William P. Langen, for the appellants;

Lyle W. Zuk, Q.C., for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on September 16, 2010, before Lane, Smith and Ottenbreit, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

On September 27, 2010, Smith, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.