Blais v. Paradis
Court headnote
Blais v. Paradis Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1933-05-16 Report [1933] SCR 452 Judges Duff, Lyman Poore; Rinfret, Thibaudeau; Lamont, John Henderson; Smith, Robert; Cannon, Lawrence Arthur Dumoulin On appeal from Quebec Subjects Contract Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Blais v. Paradis, [1933] S.C.R. 452 Date: 1933-05-16. Blais v. Paradis 1933: May 15, 16. Present: Duff C.J. and Rinfret, Lamont, Smith and Cannon JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF KING’S BENCH, APPEAL SIDE, PROVINCE OF QUEBEC Contract—Alterations to store—Building materials—Work for a fixed price or by the day—Oral evidence. APPEAL by the defendant from the decision of the Court of King’s Bench, appeal side, province of Quebec[1], dismissing the defendant’s appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court, Gelly J., in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s action was for $3,719.98, being a balance claimed for building materials furnished and work alleged to have been done by the day in fulfilment of a contract for alterations to a store. The appellant Blais admitted he owed $3,208.71, of which $2,000 were paid during the course of the work and alleged he offered $1,208.71 before the action, as the balance due; he contended that these sums were due in virtue of a contract for a fixed price of $2,241, with certain extra work done during the execution of the contract, but that for each item of this extra work, prices were agreed and accepted by the parties. The Superior Court held and maintained…
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.scc-csc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
Blais v. Paradis Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1933-05-16 Report [1933] SCR 452 Judges Duff, Lyman Poore; Rinfret, Thibaudeau; Lamont, John Henderson; Smith, Robert; Cannon, Lawrence Arthur Dumoulin On appeal from Quebec Subjects Contract Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Blais v. Paradis, [1933] S.C.R. 452 Date: 1933-05-16. Blais v. Paradis 1933: May 15, 16. Present: Duff C.J. and Rinfret, Lamont, Smith and Cannon JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF KING’S BENCH, APPEAL SIDE, PROVINCE OF QUEBEC Contract—Alterations to store—Building materials—Work for a fixed price or by the day—Oral evidence. APPEAL by the defendant from the decision of the Court of King’s Bench, appeal side, province of Quebec[1], dismissing the defendant’s appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court, Gelly J., in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s action was for $3,719.98, being a balance claimed for building materials furnished and work alleged to have been done by the day in fulfilment of a contract for alterations to a store. The appellant Blais admitted he owed $3,208.71, of which $2,000 were paid during the course of the work and alleged he offered $1,208.71 before the action, as the balance due; he contended that these sums were due in virtue of a contract for a fixed price of $2,241, with certain extra work done during the execution of the contract, but that for each item of this extra work, prices were agreed and accepted by the parties. The Superior Court held and maintained the action for the total amount, less 5 per cent for negligence and default in supervising the work, which judgment was affirmed by the appellate court. On the appeal to this Court, after hearing argument of counsel, oral judgment was delivered dismissing the appeal with costs. Appeal dismissed with costs. Gérard Lacroix for the appellant. Roger Létourneau for the respondent. [1] (1932) Q.R. 54 K.B. 495.
Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca
Hadley v Baxendale
(1854) 9 Exch 341