Search results
- A party need not intend for the other party to rely on their dishonest conduct. The party's motives are not relevant to whether the duty of honesty is breached, unless such motives show dishonesty.
www.bennettjones.com/Blogs-Section/Supreme-Court-of-Canada-Silence-Can-Breach-the-Contractual-Duty-of-Good-Faith-HonestySupreme Court of Canada: Silence Can Breach the Contractual ...
People also ask
Can a defendant rely on a dishonest conduct?
What happens if a defendant breaches the duty of honest performance?
What happens if a claimant is fundamentally dishonest?
Do counsel have a duty to make honest statements?
Can a witness cross examine on dishonesty?
Do parties have a duty of honest performance?
To succeed in deceit, a plaintiff must prove that (1) a false representation or statement was made by the defendant, (2) which was knowingly false, (3) was made with the intention to deceive the plaintiff, and (4) which materially induced the plaintiff to act, resulting in damage.
- Negligence
The tort of negligent misrepresentation involves the...
- Conspiracy
So too is conduct that is in breach of the Criminal Code,...
- Nuisance
Nuisance is a field of liability that describes a type of...
- Defaming of Character
d) whether the defendant conducted a prolonged or hostile...
- Slander of Title of Property
Statute Law Right of Action For Misuse. In some...
- Malicious Prosecution
Malicious prosecution is an intentional tort that requires...
- Misuse of Process
The tort of abuse of process has four elements. As held by...
- Assignment
The ability to assign a debt or legal chose in action is...
- Negligence
- The Superior Court Decision: Paulus v. Fleury, 2018 ONSC 1188
- The Court of Appeal Decision: Paulus v. Fleury, 2018 Onca 1072
- When Do False Statements by Lawyers Amount to Civil Fraud?
- Inquiries
On February 20, 2018, the motions judge in Paulus v. Fleury ruled that statements made by the plaintiff lawyer to defence counsel at a pre-trial to induce a settlement in a personal injury action amounted to civil fraud, and based on this finding the Court set aside a settlement for $850,000 agreed to at the pre-trial. The Plaintiffs appealed the d...
The Court of Appeal noted that the motions judge did not have the benefit of Groia v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2018 SCC 27, at the time he heard the motion. Groia is relevant because of its discussion regarding a lawyer’s duty of resolute advocacy on behalf of a client. That duty is relevant to an assessment of whether submissions by counsel am...
In Paulus v. Fleury, the Court of Appeal held that a factual misrepresentation by counsel in judicial proceedings could amount to deceit or civil fraud when, for example, counsel tender a forged cheque as evidence of payment of a debt knowing the cheque was a false document. “In those circumstances there would be no reasonable basis for the factual...
At Investigation Counsel PC, we investigate and litigate fraud recovery cases. If you discover you are a victim of fraud, contact us to have your case assessed and a strategy for recovery mapped out before contacting police or alerting the fraudster. We also promote victim advocacy and academic discussion through various private and public professi...
As Brown J. reasoned, a defendant may fulfil its contractual obligations to the letter but breach the duty of honest performance, causing loss to the plaintiff as a result of its reliance on the dishonest conduct.
Dec 21, 2020 · Key Takeaways. Here are our top three takeaways from the Supreme Court of Canada’s judgment in Callow: Strict compliance with a contractual termination clause is not sufficient to avoid liability. There was no dispute in Callow that the defendants had provided the plaintiff with the required 10 days’ notice under the contract’s termination clause.
Nov 26, 2021 · A person cannot take a deliberate decision not to rely on evidence of fraud, unless he is not only aware of that evidence, but knows that he can rely on it to plead fraud in answer to the case brought by his opponent.
Jan 5, 2021 · If a party to a contract remains silent when it becomes aware it has caused a counterparty to misapprehend a matter directly connected to the performance of the contract or the exercise of a contractual right, that party may be liable for a breach of the duty of honest performance.
Mar 26, 2021 · As to the conduct of the proceedings, there is a requirement to cross examine on dishonesty. There is no requirement to use words such as ‘dishonest’, ‘fraud’ or ‘lying’. What matters is that a witness is given ‘fair notice of a challenge to their honesty and an opportunity to deal with it’.
