1368039 Ontario Inc. v. Reid, 2014 ONSC 316

CITATION: 1368039 Ontario Inc. v. Reid, 2014 ONSC 316

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO: 235/12

COURT FILE NOS: SC-11-00119908-000 &

SC-11-00119908-00D1

DATE: 20140115

BETWEEN:

1368039 Ontario Inc.

Appellant/Defendant

– and –

David Reid

Respondent/Plaintiff

Salma Sheikh,

for the Appellant/Defendant

David Reid,

On his own behalf

Heard: January 14, 2014

REASONS FOR DECISION

WHITAKER, J.

1This is an appeal following trial and judgment in the Small Claims Court. The Court granted judgment to the plaintiff. The defendant is the appellant here.

2At trial, the plaintiff alleged breach of contract, partly written, partly verbal. The defendant agrees there was an enforceable contract written and verbal. The parties part on whether there was a breach of the contract and if so whether damages are appropriate.

3The defendant operates a cruise ship in Toronto harbour. The plaintiff organizes dances on these ships. The plaintiff did so in this case by booking a ship from the plaintiff for July 2, 2011 and entering into a contract for this booking.

4After the ship was booked, the plaintiff took the steps necessary to launch the event (organized tickets, food, music and advertising). The defendant then unilaterally cancelled the booking and the plaintiff brought this action.

5The trial judge found for the plaintiff. He concluded there was a breached contract and damages were payable in the amount of $5,850.00. The Court assessed thrown away event expenses of $850.00 and lost profits of $5000.00 - for a total of $5850.00

6The defendant submits that the evidence before the Court at trial could not support a finding of damages and the trial judge committed a fatal error in so finding.

7There is no dispute that on questions of fact, the test to be applied is whether the trial judge committed a palpable and overriding error.

8As indicated, it is agreed there was an enforceable contract mixed verbally and in writing. It was not seriously disputed that this contract was breached by the defendant when he cancelled the July 2, 2011 date unilaterally and over the objections of the plaintiff.

9I have reviewed the transcript of the trial.

10The evidence given by the plaintiff at trial in support of the claim for damages was scant. As noted by the appellant, the plaintiff indicated in cross examination that he could have brought further and better evidence on this point if he had properly understood the features of a trial. Despite some weaknesses, the evidence given at trial (documentary and by oral testimony) is sufficient in my view to find that some order for damages is appropriate. For example, there is no doubt that tickets were sold and printed, advertising was done, a caterer was engaged and DJ’s were retained.

11In the face of this evidence, it certainly was open for the trial Judge to conclude that the plaintiff suffered modest losses directly attributable to the unilateral cancellation of the event by the appellant defendant, after the parties had entered into their contract for this event.

12I find the trial judge has committed no palpable or overriding error. It is not appropriate to disturb his findings and conclusions.

13The appeal is dismissed.

14Costs are as ordered by the trial judge, fixed at $200.00 payable by the appellant to the respondent forthwith.

Whitaker J.

Released: January 15, 2014