5,109
edits
Difference between revisions of "Clinician Guide for Consumer Transactions (11:X)"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Clinician Guide for Consumer Transactions (11:X) (view source)
Revision as of 04:49, 13 August 2016
, 04:49, 13 August 2016→7. Illegality
| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
Today, courts may enforce contracts made for an illegal purpose if inequity would otherwise result, or if the purpose of the governing statute is not undermined. See ''Still v Canada (Minister of National Revenue)'', [1997] FCJ No 1622, [1998] 1 FC 549 (CA). The Court will consider the purpose and object of a statutory prohibition when deciding whether or not the contract is enforceable. ''Continental Bank Leasing Corp v Canada'', [1998] 2 SCR 298 at para 67 in particular offers a good summary of the law of illegality. | Today, courts may enforce contracts made for an illegal purpose if inequity would otherwise result, or if the purpose of the governing statute is not undermined. See ''Still v Canada (Minister of National Revenue)'', [1997] FCJ No 1622, [1998] 1 FC 549 (CA). The Court will consider the purpose and object of a statutory prohibition when deciding whether or not the contract is enforceable. ''Continental Bank Leasing Corp v Canada'', [1998] 2 SCR 298 at para 67 in particular offers a good summary of the law of illegality. | ||
=== 8. Duty of Honest Performance === | |||
The Supreme Court of Canada has recently recognized that there is a general organizing principle of good faith and duty of honest performance in the context of Canadian contract law (''Bhasin v Hrynew'', 2014 SCC 71 at para 33). The duty of honest performance requires contracting parties to act honestly in the performance of contractual obligations. Note that this is not a fiduciary duty and parties remain free to act in their own self-interest, as long as they do not lie or mislead the other party. | |||
Since the duty of honest performance applies generally, to all contracts, it would also apply to consumer transactions where one party has been dishonest or misled the other party. See ''Harrison v Afexa Life Sciences Inc'', 2015 BCSC 638, where the plaintiff alleged that the defendants had breached the contractual duty of good faith and honest performance by misrepresenting the benefits of Cold-Fx to consumers. | |||
== E. Determine the Limitation Period for Making a Claim == | == E. Determine the Limitation Period for Making a Claim == | ||
