Rosen (L.M.) Realty Ltd. v. D'Amore, Renaud, Renaud and 318611 Ontario Inc., (1984) 3 O.A.C. 49 (CA)

• Judge: Houlden, Weatherston and Goodman, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: March 26, 1984
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1984), 3 O.A.C. 49 (CA)

Rosen Realty Ltd. v. D'Amore (1984), 3 O.A.C. 49 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

L.M. Rosen Realty Ltd. v. D'Amore, Renaud, Renaud and 318611 Ontario Inc.

Indexed As: Rosen (L.M.) Realty Ltd. v. D'Amore, Renaud, Renaud and 318611 Ontario Inc.

Ontario Court of Appeal

Houlden, Weatherston and Goodman, JJ.A.

March 26, 1984.

Summary:

A realtor purchased 118.5 acres of land. Subsequently the realtor, D'Amore and Renaud entered into a trust agreement which provided that each party owned an undivided one-third interest in the land as tenants in common. Later Renaud assigned his interest to his wife who conveyed her interest to D'Amore. The trust agreement required the consent of the parties for the conveyance to D'Amore - and the realtor did not consent to the conveyance to D'Amore. The realtor claimed damages for breach of contract and inducing breach of contract.

The trial court allowed the realtor's action and awarded the realtor damages. The parties appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal set aside the award of damages to the realtor for breach of contract and inducing breach of contract. The court held that the conveyance to D'Amore was a nullity.

Contracts - Topic 7162

Novation where new party introduced - Elements of - The Ontario Court of Appeal referred to the circumstances which must be established for a novations involving a new party - See paragraph 36.

Deeds and Documents - Topic 3186

Conveyance - Invalid conveyances - Nullities - An owner of a joint interest in land (under a trust agreement) conveyed his interest without the consent of one of the other joint owners (which consent was required by the trust agreement) - The Ontario Court of Appeal held that such a conveyance or assignment is invalid and as between the parties it is a nullity - See paragraph 35.

Interest - Topic 2010

Agreement to pay interest - Calculation - Compound interest - The Ontario Court of Appeal refused to award compound interest where there was no express provision in the agreement between the parties for the payment of compound interest - See paragraph 60.

Cases Noticed:

Attorney General of British Columbia v. Salter, [1939] 1 D.L.R. 513, refd to. [para. 36].

Counsel:

Ross R. Nicholson, for Pat D'Amore and 318611 Ontario Inc., defendants (appellants);

Rodney M. Godard, for Abel Renaud and Lucille Renaud, defendants (appellants);

R.J. Rolls, Q.C., and H.T. Strosberg, Q.C., for the plaintiff (respondent) L.M. Rosen Realty Ltd.

This appeal was heard by Houlden, Weatherston and Goodman, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal on November 3 and 4, 1983.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Goodman, J.A., and was released on March 26, 1984.