5,230
edits
Desy Wahyuni (talk | contribs) m |
|||
Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
A leading case in this area is ''International Paper Industries Ltd v Top Line Industries Inc'', [1996] 7 WWR 179, 135 DLR (4th) 423 (BCCA), in which a lease for a portion of land was declared invalid, preventing the tenant from exercising the option to renew, because the land was subdivided contrary to the ''Land Title Act'', RSBC 1996, c 250. | A leading case in this area is ''International Paper Industries Ltd v Top Line Industries Inc'', [1996] 7 WWR 179, 135 DLR (4th) 423 (BCCA), in which a lease for a portion of land was declared invalid, preventing the tenant from exercising the option to renew, because the land was subdivided contrary to the ''Land Title Act'', RSBC 1996, c 250. | ||
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 | 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 the contract is enforceable or not. Continental Bank Leasing Corp v Canada, [1998] 2 SCR 298 at para 67 in particular offers a good summary of the law of illegality. | ||
edits