Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

Citation: Deep Cove Marine v. Romkey, 2009 NSSC 250

 

Date:  20090821

Docket: Hfx No. 281864

Registry: Halifax

 

Between:

J. Hartling Holdings Incorporated,

a body corporate, carrying on business as

Deep Cove Marine

Plaintiff

- and -

 

Margaret Cecilia Romkey, Marc Adam Romkey

and Jim Snair, the latter carrying on business as

Sunnybrook Yachts

Defendants

 

 

LIBRARY HEADING

 

 

Judge:             The Honourable  Justice Gerald R.P. Moir

 

Heard:                        June 4, 2009, in Halifax, Nova Scotia

 

Subject:                       Summary judgment; negligent misrepresentation; misrepresentation going to rescission; Sale of Goods Act implied conditions

 

Summary:                   The Romkeys sold a yacht that had been in an accident to Hartling, and Snair acted as agent for both sides.  Although all defendants agree that an accident history is material on the sale of a used yacht, the information was not given to Mr. Hartling.  He was told that the yacht was “like new”.  Nothing about representations was put into the purchase agreement, but a clause negativing misrepresentations and a clause for an “as is, where is” sale were included in the bill of sale, which Mr. Hartling signed.

 

Issues:                        Whether summary judgment should be granted against a claim in negligent misrepresentation, a claim for rescission founded on misrepresentation, or claims based on terms implied under the Sale of Goods Act.

 

 

 


Result:                        There are genuine issues of fact requiring a trial on the claims in negligence and for rescission.  No such issue exists on the Sale of Goods Act claims, and none of them are shown to otherwise amount to a claim with a real chance of success.  The Sale of Goods Act claims are dismissed, the others continue.

 

 

THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.  QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.