Reflection on the concept of a prudent and diligent buyer

This post, published on Éditions Yvon Blais’ blog on latent defects on January 9, 2018 (FR), discusses the judgement in the leading case Lavoie v. Comtois (Full Text | Fiche Quantum), which addresses the concept of a prudent and diligent buyer. Essentially, a prudent and diligent buyer must conduct a thorough and attentive visual examination of the building and must remain alert as to any clues that could suggest the presence of a defect. If a serious doubt forms in his mind, he must investigate further.

In this decision, the judge concluded that the buyers could not have ignored the defect affecting the centenary house in question: they were informed of the water infiltration problems not only by the sellers, but also from the pre-purchase inspection report.

In this sense, a problem affecting a building will not be considered a latent defect if a prudent and diligent buyer, placed in the same circumstances and having the same experience and the same expertise as the buyer in question, could have discovered the defect in the context of such an examination. The buyer will not be considered a prudent and diligent buyer if he did not investigate further, which in certain cases means using the services of an expert, if a thorough and attentive visual examination made it possible to detect serious signs of a defect or problem.

While this decision was rendered in 1999, it is still relevant and regularly cited in jurisprudence for defining the concept of a prudent and diligent buyer. It constitutes a leading case on the matter.