Supreme Court of Canada
Netupsky et al. v. Hamilton et al.,  S.C.R. 203
Boris Netupsky and Nerupsky Engineering Company Limited (Plaintiffs) Appellants;
Gerald Hamilton, carrying on business in the firm name and style of Gerald Hamilton and Associates, and the said Gerald Hamilton and Associates (Defendant) Respondents.
1969: October 8, 9, 10; 1969: October 21.
Present: Cartwright C.J. and Martland, Judson, Spence and Pigeon JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
Contract—Partial performance by plaintiffs—Action for damages for breach of contract—Counterclaim for loss sustained—Repudiation by plaintiffs and acceptance of repudiation by defendants.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia, allowing an appeal from a judgment of Gregory J. Appeal dismissed.
W.J. Wallace, Q.C., and J.T. Law, for the plaintiffs, appellants.
John G. Alley, for the defendants, respondents.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by
THE CHIEF JUSTICE—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia1 pronounced on May 16, 1969, whereby an appeal from the judgment of Gregory J. given on May 31, 1968, was allowed, the action dismissed and the counterclaim upheld.
The action was for damages for breach of contract; the defence and counterclaim were based on the allegation that when the contract had been but partially performed it was repudiated by the plaintiffs and the repudiation was accepted by the defendants.
The reasons for the unanimous judgment of the Court of Appeal were delivered by Maclean J.A. We find ourselves so completely in agreement with those reasons that we are content to adopt them and have nothing to add.
The appeal is dismissed with costs.
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Solicitors for the plaintiffs, appellants: Bull, Housser & Tupper, Vancouver.
Solicitors for the defendants, respondents: Davis, Hossie, Campbell, Brazier & McLorg, Vancouver.
 8 D.L.R. (3d) 352.