A bride who said “no” to her wedding dress got a “yes” in Nova Scotia Small Claims Court this week.
In a decision posted Wednesday, adjudicator Gregg Knudsen favoured Ginger Kim Roy’s claim against seamstress Ruth Ryan, doing business as In Stitches with Ruth.
The dress was to be a mash-up of two different gowns, as Roy was unable to find one exactly to her liking.
“However, she found two dresses, each with a part she liked, i.e. one with the skirt and train, the other with a bodice that she preferred over other styles,” Knudsen noted. She asked the seamstress to combine the two, along with making the bridesmaids’ dresses and pocket squares for the groom, best man and ushers.
“In reviewing the evidence, I have no doubt that Ms. Ryan worked hard and tried her best to complete the best wedding dresses and sew it as stipulated by Ms. Roy. The job was more complicated than anticipated and took longer than either party had planned,” Knudsen said.
Pauline Mullin was the seamstress who ended up sewing the bridal gown Roy wore down the aisle after rejecting the original creation. After multiple delays and fittings, and 10 days before the wedding, she saw the dress and testified there appeared to be “one dart too many,” a lack of seam allowances, and that the dress wasn’t the same on both sides, appearing to pull to one side.
Knudsen acknowledged the subjective nature of what constitutes a “skilful and workmanlike manner” for different wedding gowns, but said there were some basics that should have been followed.
“For example, it must fit properly and look how a dress should appear in terms of symmetry and design . . . If the Claimant had not provided photographs in evidence, I would have disallowed the claim. The photographs are clear. The dress was tight, but it was too tight and did not fit correctly as it could not be closed in the back. More significantly, as Ms. Roy described it, the top is ‘lopsided,’” he wrote.
While Roy paid for the cheap wedding dresses and gave Ryan a $100 tip, she wasn’t legally stuck, Knudsen said.
“Although acceptance and payment are relevant considerations in assessing credibility, the Consumer Protection Act applies regardless of whether the garment was delivered and paid for,” he noted.
Knudsen awarded $300 — the amount Ryan originally contracted to do the sewing for — in special damages, $100 in general damages, and costs of $191.26. Roy had sought a total of $1,331.26
“By all accounts, the Roy’s wedding was a happy occasion. That said, Ms. Roy has experienced disappointment, upset and stress as a result of the breach of contract,” he wrote.
Save
