Use this fact situation to answer the questions that follow it.
In January 1941 in Canada, John Landlord and Harry Tenant enter into a lease under which Harry agrees to rent a house from John for five years at a rent of $1000.00 per month. In March 1941, Canada declares war on Germany and John tells Harry that until the war is over, Harry will not have to pay rent. Of course, Harry stops paying rent while the war goes on. The war ends in January 1945, and now John Landlord sues Harry for all of the rent from March 1941 to present. In turn, Harry is thinking of suing John Landlord on the basis that his statement to Harry about not paying the rent during the war was a contract.
In the fact situation above,
a. John Landlord can argue that he is entitled to the rent, because there was no consideration for his promise to Harry, and the court will accept this.
b. Harry will be able to successfully sue John Landlord for breach of his agreement not to make Harry pay rent during the war.
c. John Landlord can argue that it would be unjust for Harry not to have to pay the rent, and this argument will succeed.
d. at the very least the court will value John Landlord's claim on a quantum meruit basis.
e. Harry Tenant will argue that John Landlord's promise in March 1941 stops John Landlord from suing him for rent from March 1941 to the end of the war, and this argument will be a good defence to John Landlord's action.
Quick Reply
