The Court of Appeal affirmed, following the Federal Court of Appeal's decision in Apotex Inc. v. Allergan Inc., 2016 FCA 155, that «Evidence of the actual state of mind or subjective intention of the parties is irrelevant to
the existence of a valid contract and its terms» (See para. 35).
Not exact matches
[123] If the exclusion clause is held to be
valid and applicable, the Court may undertake a third enquiry, namely whether the Court should nevertheless refuse to enforce the
valid exclusion clause because
of the
existence of an overriding public policy, proof
of which lies on the party seeking to avoid enforcement
of the clause, that outweighs the very strong public interest in the enforcement
of contracts.
Schuckman Realty v. Marine Midland Bank (244 A.D. 2d 400)- broker not entitled to recover a commission from defendant under
contract theory where broker entered into brokerage agreements with parties other than the defendant; broker's claim against defendant in quantum meruit fails due to the
existence of a
valid and enforceable agreement governing the particular subject matter (i.e., commission agreement between broker and other parties).