22:
91:
245:
Jack Rafuse and
Franklyn Cordon were solicitors who had been hired by a company, which had purchased the shares of Stonehouse Motel and Restaurant Ltd. The agreement of sale required the purchasers to take out a mortgage on the property and to use the assets used as part of the purchase price of the
332:
On the statute of limitations, it was held that the plaintiffs were not statute-barred from commencing an action. The commencement of the limitation period was postponed by the common law "discoverability principle:" "A cause of action arises for purposes of a limitation period when the material
286:
There was contributory negligence on the part of the Nova Scotia Trust
Company or those for whom it was responsible because of the approval of the mortgage loan and the instructions to the respondents by persons of legal
290:
The contract between the Nova Scotia Trust
Company and the respondents, having as its object an illegal transaction, was itself illegal and could not therefore be the basis of an action in damages.
301:
Can a solicitor be liable to a client in tort and in contract for negligence in the performance of the professional services for which the solicitor has been retained?
329:
On the first issue, he held that the duty in tort and in contract are two entirely-separate duties and can be held concurrently by a defendant.
403:
333:
facts on which it is based have been discovered or ought to have been discovered by the plaintiff by the exercise of reasonable diligence."
43:
408:
283:
They had not been negligent, particularly in view of the conflicting judicial opinion on the question of the validity of the mortgage.
65:
398:
36:
30:
304:
Were the respondent solicitors negligent in carrying out the mortgage transaction for the Nova Scotia Trust
Company?
47:
175:
265:, the mortgage was invalidated. Having lost the case, Central Trust brought an action against the lawyers for
375:
308:
258:
218:
96:
383:
234:
349:
257:
Ltd., tried to prevent the foreclosure by claiming that the mortgage was invalid. The case went to the
90:
379:
270:
230:
314:
Is the appellant prevented from bringing its action because of the illegality of the mortgage?
179:
191:
163:
392:
187:
183:
171:
156:
122:
311:
on the part of the Nova Scotia Trust
Company or those for whom it was responsible?
249:
Eight years later, the creditor for the mortgage, Central Trust Co., initiated a
250:
246:
shares. The solicitors had been retained to complete the mortgage transaction.
266:
254:
226:
167:
222:
293:
The appellant's action was barred by the statute of limitations.
317:
Is the appellant's action barred by the statute of limitations?
280:
Their liability, if any, was in contract only and not in tort.
15:
116:
Central Trust
Company v Jack P Rafuse and Franklyn W Cordon
233:
as well as the doctrine of discoverability under the
202:
197:
147:
139:
131:
121:
111:
104:
83:
326:LeDain J wrote the reasons for the majority.
276:In their defence, Rafuse and Cordon claimed:
263:Central and Eastern Trust Co v Irving Oil Ltd
8:
217:, 2 SCR 147 is a leading decision of the
66:Learn how and when to remove this message
29:This article includes a list of general
342:
80:
7:
350:SCC Case Information - Docket 17753
35:it lacks sufficient corresponding
14:
89:
20:
297:These issues before the Court:
253:of the mortgage. The creditor,
143:Central Trust appeal dismissed.
1:
404:Supreme Court of Canada cases
78:Supreme Court of Canada case
425:
105:Hearing: December 6, 1984
409:1986 in Canadian case law
214:Central Trust Co v Rafuse
152:
107:Judgment: October 9, 1986
88:
84:Central Trust Co v Rafuse
376:Supreme Court of Canada
352:Supreme Court of Canada
309:contributory negligence
259:Supreme Court of Canada
219:Supreme Court of Canada
97:Supreme Court of Canada
50:more precise citations.
399:Canadian tort case law
235:statute of limitations
322:Reasons of the court
203:Unanimous reasons by
271:breach of contract
261:. In its decision
231:breach of contract
210:
209:
76:
75:
68:
416:
362:
359:
353:
347:
221:on liability of
180:Julien Chouinard
176:William McIntyre
161:Puisne Justices:
148:Court membership
93:
81:
71:
64:
60:
57:
51:
46:this article by
37:inline citations
24:
23:
16:
424:
423:
419:
418:
417:
415:
414:
413:
389:
388:
371:
366:
365:
360:
356:
348:
344:
339:
324:
243:
159:
106:
100:
79:
72:
61:
55:
52:
42:Please help to
41:
25:
21:
12:
11:
5:
422:
420:
412:
411:
406:
401:
391:
390:
387:
386:
370:
369:External links
367:
364:
363:
354:
341:
340:
338:
335:
323:
320:
319:
318:
315:
312:
305:
302:
295:
294:
291:
288:
284:
281:
242:
239:
208:
207:
204:
200:
199:
195:
194:
192:Gerald Le Dain
164:Roland Ritchie
154:Chief Justice:
150:
149:
145:
144:
141:
137:
136:
133:
129:
128:
125:
119:
118:
113:
112:Full case name
109:
108:
102:
101:
94:
86:
85:
77:
74:
73:
28:
26:
19:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
421:
410:
407:
405:
402:
400:
397:
396:
394:
385:
381:
377:
374:Full text of
373:
372:
368:
358:
355:
351:
346:
343:
336:
334:
330:
327:
321:
316:
313:
310:
306:
303:
300:
299:
298:
292:
289:
285:
282:
279:
278:
277:
274:
272:
268:
264:
260:
256:
252:
247:
240:
238:
236:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
215:
205:
201:
198:Reasons given
196:
193:
189:
188:Bertha Wilson
185:
184:Antonio Lamer
181:
177:
173:
172:Willard Estey
169:
165:
162:
158:
157:Brian Dickson
155:
151:
146:
142:
138:
134:
130:
126:
124:
120:
117:
114:
110:
103:
99:
98:
92:
87:
82:
70:
67:
59:
49:
45:
39:
38:
32:
27:
18:
17:
378:decision at
357:
345:
331:
328:
325:
296:
275:
262:
248:
244:
213:
212:
211:
160:
153:
115:
95:
62:
53:
34:
251:foreclosure
48:introducing
393:Categories
382: and
337:References
307:Was there
267:negligence
255:Irving Oil
241:Background
227:negligence
223:solicitors
168:Jean Beetz
132:Docket No.
56:March 2008
31:references
361:2 SCR 29.
287:training.
206:Le Dain J
127:2 SCR 147
123:Citations
44:improve
384:CanLII
140:Ruling
135:17753
33:, but
380:LexUM
269:and
229:and
225:in
395::
273:.
237:.
190:,
186:,
182:,
178:,
174:,
170:,
166:,
69:)
63:(
58:)
54:(
40:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
