Contest losers sue winner, and lose again

A Nova Scotia dealership group's C$100,000 contest ($75,000) took an unexpected turn from the showroom to the courtroom when disappointed finalists sued the successful one.

Now the four losers have lost a second time, and instead of getting a chunk of the prize, they’ve been ordered to pay the winner’s legal bills.

On Jan. 17, the MacDonald Auto Group of Halifax held a draw for a C$100,000 grand prize to celebrate the company’s 50th anniversary. It began with a Nissan store and now also sells Ford, FCA, Kia and Toyota vehicles.

The contestants had purchased a vehicle in the previous year.

It was the dealer group’s biggest-ever promotion, co-owner Jim MacDonald said, although he has given away several cars over the years.

The five finalists or their representatives attended, including finalist Darin Seymour’s wife.

Before the drawing, they allegedly agreed to split the prize five ways, regardless of whose name was picked. At the drawing, the finalists were told that only one check would be issued but there was no restriction on how the winner later disbursed the money.

Seymour won and his wife got the check, but the couple refused to divvy up the proceeds.

The four disgruntled finalists sued the Seymours for breach of contract.

The dealership group wasn’t sued, and MacDonald said he was “kind of shocked” when he learned of the lawsuit, adding, “Not one customer called me about the issue.”

“I was kind of disappointed,” he continued. “I guess you can’t control human nature.”

Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice Frank Edwards swiftly ended the case, finding that Seymour’s wife had no authority to obligate her husband to the agreement.

“Darin Seymour did nothing to give anyone the impression that he authorized his spouse to do anything more than receive his prize.”

“[Seymour] said he never would have agreed to give $80,000 of his winnings to strangers,” and his wife “never spoke to her husband about splitting the prize,” Edwards said. “One person, even a spouse, cannot make a decision like that for another person without that person’s authorization.”

The judge strongly suggested the disappointed losers lick their wounds rather than pursue the case further and ordered them to cover the Seymours’ $1,200 legal costs.