I am of the view that the parties here have not prescribed the payment of interest after judgment but rather the payment of interest on principal after as well as before default. I refer to St. John v. Rykert (1884), 1884 CanLII 7 (SCC), 10 S.C.R. 278, per Strong J. at p. 288: “… and I should have thought that a proper and salutary construction, requiring as it does parties who stipulate for a larger amount of interest than the usual and legal rate to make clear by precise and unambiguous language what their intention was.”
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.