David E. Fine

The plaintiffs contracted with the defendant moving company to move and store their household goods.

The defendant assured the plaintiffs that their goods would be secure in a locked trailer on the defendant's lot.

However, the trailer was left unattended on a public street overnight and was stolen.

The defendant admitted liability but sought to rely on a limitation of liability clause limiting damages to $0.60 per pound.

The trial judge found the clause unenforceable.

The Court of Appeal upheld this decision, finding that enforcing the limitation clause would be unconscionable given the false assurances of security.

The appeal was allowed only to set aside damages awarded to the plaintiffs' corporations.

The appellants appealed a decision finding that no unconditional contract arose between the parties that would create a security interest requiring registration when the appellants took possession of two trucks.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the application judge's finding that the agreement was conditional on obtaining financing was a finding of fact supported by the record, and there was no palpable and overriding error.