The appellant purchased a used vehicle from the respondents, who misrepresented its condition as 'top of the line' and a non-smoker's car.
The trial judge in Small Claims Court found misrepresentation and awarded $5,000 in damages as an 'equitable resolution'.
On appeal, the Divisional Court found the trial judge made a palpable and overriding error by failing to provide adequate reasons for his damages award and by failing to base the award on the vehicle's Black Book value.
The court also found an error of law in the trial judge's refusal to award pre-judgment and post-judgment interest.
The appeal was allowed, and damages were reassessed at $7,741.60 plus interest and costs.
