Ta et al. v. Bonis, 2006 SKPC 05

• Judge: Bogdasavich, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: January 19, 2006
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2006 SKPC 05;(2006), 273 Sask.R. 155 (PC)

Ta v. Bonis (2006), 273 Sask.R. 155 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2006] Sask.R. TBEd. FE.005

Quang Ta and Quyen Pham (plaintiffs) v. Jim Bonis (defendant)

(2005 No. 272; 2006 SKPC 05)

Indexed As: Ta et al. v. Bonis

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Bogdasavich, P.C.J.

January 19, 2006.

Summary:

Two plaintiffs claimed the return of a $5,000 deposit given to the defendant respecting the purchase of a restaurant.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court, allowed the plaintiff Pham's action but dismissed the plaintiff Ta's action.

Contracts - Topic 4051

Remedies for breach - Liquidated damages and penalties - Forfeiture of deposit - General - The parties had a verbal agreement respecting the purchase of a restaurant for $160,000 - Pham (purchaser) gave Bonis a cheque for $5,000 - No terms were discussed respecting this deposit - Pham decided not to purchase the restaurant and sued for the return of the deposit - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court inferred that the $5,000 was intended as part payment toward the purchase price - There was no suggestion that it was made to guarantee performance - In the absence of an express term in the parties' verbal agreement that the money was non-refundable, Pham was entitled to its return.

Cases Noticed:

Barber and Barber v. Glen and Glen, [1987] 6 W.W.R. 689; 59 Sask.R. 49 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

M. & M. Holdings Ltd. v. Funk, [2000] Sask.R. Uned. 236 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 17].

Counsel:

Ryan Malley, for the plaintiffs;

Ralph K. Ottenbreit, Q.C., for the defendant.

This action was heard at Regina, Saskatchewan, before Bogdasavich, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who released the following judgment on January 19, 2006.