Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
4,782 result(s)
-
4,251.
Ryder v. The King - (1905) 36 SCR 462 - 1905-06-26
Supreme Court JudgmentsLabour law
The deceased, William Edward Ryder, met his death on the 20th April, 1903, while in the employment of the Department of Public Works of Canada by an accident which occurred at the launching of a tug named "Sir Hector," the property of the Government of Canada. [...] Mr. Sweet had under him a foreman named John Davis, who was the foreman in charge of the launching, and about ten other men, including the deceased William Edward Ryder, were engaged under the foreman John Davis in the launching. [...] While the preparations were still going on the vessel, by some accident, was prematurely launched, and John Davis, the foreman, and William Edward Ryder, were caught and crushed to death under her side as she moved down to the water.
-
4,252.
Langley v. Kahnert - (1905) 36 SCR 397 - 1905-06-13
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
The learned trial judge, Sir William Meredith, stated in his judgment the facts upon which the questions raised here are to be disposed of:
-
4,253.
Williams v. Grand Trunk Ry. Co. - (1905) 36 SCR 321 - 1905-05-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
Williams v. Grand Trunk Ry. Co., (1905) 36 SCR 321 Supreme Court of Canada [...] Williams v. Grand Trunk Ry. Co. (1905) 36 SCR 321 Date: 1905-05-30 [...] A. R. Williams Appellant And The Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada
-
4,254.
Benallack v. Bank of British North America - (1905) 36 SCR 120 - 1905-05-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
And though there may not have been any express decision of the point upon this legislation in this court the late Chief Justice, Sir William Ritchie, in Gibbons v. McDonald ([9]), at page 589 indicates that in his view there must be
-
4,255.
Syndicat Lyonnais du Klondyke v. McGrade - (1905) 36 SCR 251 - 1905-05-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
See remarks of Manning J. in Cooke v. Union Bank ([23]); Gregory v. Alger ([24]), at pages 573-574, per Williams J. and at page 575, pet Hood J., also Baker's Creek Consolidated Gold Mining Co. v. Hack ([25]), at page 223, per Owen C.J., quoting Gibbs v. Messer([26]), at page
-
4,256.
Canadian Pacific Ry. Co. v. James Bay Ry. Co. - (1905) 36 SCR 42 - 1905-04-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsStatutes
There were also two branch lines, one from Selkirk to Pembina and one from some point on main line to Fort William. [...] (a) A small settlement existed at Port Arthur and Fort William; [Page 91] [...] (2.) "A branch line of railway from some point on the main line of railway to Fort William on Thunder Bay."
-
4,257.
Meisner v. Meisner - (1905) 36 SCR 34 - 1905-03-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsStatutes
William says, he, Samuel, was to have the use of it the same as I had. [...] Samuel and William of the homestead together with stock and implements. [...] The brother William says: Samuel gave me a deed. I put it on record.
-
4,258.
SS. Calvin Austin v. Lovitt - (1905) 35 SCR 616 - 1905-03-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsMaritime law
William L. Lovitt (Plaintiff) Respondent. 1905: Feb. 27, 28; 1905: March 6. [...] The whistles were answered by the "Williams" towing the fishing schooner, by the [...] Pike says he heard the answer of the "Williams", but did not hear the other two.
-
4,259.
Slaughenwhite v. The King - (1905) 35 SCR 607 - 1905-03-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
The prisoner, appellant, was indicted "for that he, on the 18th day of May, 1904, at St. Margaret's Bay Road, in the County of Halifax, with intent to disable one William Hill, did unlawfully wound the said William Hill, by shooting at him, the said William Hill, with a loaded gun." [...] Grirouabd J.—At the July Assizes, 1904, at Halifax, the appellant was indicted for that he, on the 18th May, 1904, at St. Margaret's Bay Road, in the County of Halifax, with the intent to disable one "William Hill, did unlawfully wound the said William IIill by shooting at him with a loaded gun. [...] with intent to disable one William Hill, did unlawfully wound the said William Hill by shooting at him.
-
4,260.
In Re Legislation Respecting Abstention from Labour on Sunday - (1905) 35 SCR 581 - 1905-02-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
It is to be borne in mind that this sec. 52 was in its essential feature copied from sect. 4 of the statute (3 & 4 William IV. ch. 41) constituting the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
-
4,261.
Dominion Iron & Steel Co. v. Oliver - (1905) 35 SCR 517 - 1905-01-31
Supreme Court JudgmentsLabour law
William Oliver (Plaintiff) Respondent. 1904: Nov. 30; 1904: Dec. 1; 1905: Jan. 31.
-
4,262.
Moore v. Roper - (1905) 35 SCR 533 - 1905-01-31
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
The defendant in evidence says: 'After that I shipped the fish to Mr. William Ross for Mr. H. E. Moore in payment of the claim he had against me.' He had already received from Treen, as trustee, a statement of the account and a notification and his letter advising of the shipment of the fish was addressed to Treen."
-
4,263.
Sievert v. Brookfield - (1905) 35 SCR 494 - 1905-01-31
Supreme Court JudgmentsOn June 1st, 1882, one William M. Harrington was the owner of the building and premises, and on that date executed a mortgage thereof to one Brenton H. Collins. [...] William M. Harrington subsequently died and the title to the property became vested in one Emily A. Piers, a trustee under the will of the said William M. Harrington.
-
4,264.
Smitheman v. The King - (1905) 35 SCR 490 - 1905-01-31
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
William Smitheman Appellant And His Majesty The King Respondent
-
4,265.
Canada Foundry Co. v. Mitchell - (1904) 35 SCR 452 - 1904-12-14
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
The general law on the point may be accepted as that laid down by Lord Justice Bowen in the case of Thomas v. Quartermaine[1], as explained and modified by the decision of the House of Lords in Smith v. Baker[2], and by the Appellate Court in the still later case of Williams v. Birmingham [...] The latest decision on the question is that of the Court of Appeal in Williams v. Birmingham Battery and Metal Co.[7], where it was held that to enable an employer to successfully invoke the doctrine of
-
4,266.
Canada Woollen Mills v. Traplin - (1904) 35 SCR 424 - 1904-12-14
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Smith v. Baker[2]; Moore v. The J.D. Moore Co.[3]; Grant v. Acadia Coal Co.[4]; Williams v. Birmingham Battery and Metal Co.[5] [...] Williams v. Birmingham Battery and Metal Co.[16] I fail to find anything in the evidence relieving the defendants from their common law liability arising out of the injuries caused by the defective elevator. [...] I think, therefore, that, as no knowledge was brought home to the company, the case comes clearly within the decision of Williams v. Birmingham Battery and Metal Co.[66] and Matthews v. Hamilton Powder Co.[67], and that there is no liability at common law.
-
4,267.
Cox v. Adams - (1904) 35 SCR 393 - 1904-12-14
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
In the case of McClatchie v. Haslam[61], it was said by Kekewich J. in setting aside a deed given by a wife to secure a debt due by her husband to a society of which he was secretary, that the rule laid down by Lord Westbury in Williams v. Bayley[62], was at least as strong in the case of a husband and wife as of a father
-
4,268.
Montreal Water & Power Co. v. Davie - (1904) 35 SCR 255 - 1904-11-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
Beaudin K.C. and W. J. White K.C. for the appellants cited arts. 275, 548 C.P.Q. ; art: 356 C. C. ; The Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Roy ([1]) ; Molleur v. Dougall ([2]) ; Lusignan v. Sauvageau ([3]) ; Bellay v. Guay ([4]) ; Archbald v. Delisle ([5]) ; Drysdale v. Degas ([6]) ; Williams v. Stephenson ([7]) ; Cogh/in v.
-
4,269.
Ex Parte Smitheman - (1904) 35 SCR 189 - 1904-06-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsPrerogative writs
Ex Parte, William Smitheman 1904: June 22. ON APPLICATION, IN CHAMBERS, FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. [...] Application by motion before Davies J., in chambers, for a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of imprisonment of William Smitheman in the Penitentiary at Dorchester in the Province of New Brunswick, on a conviction by His Honour William B. Wallace, judge of the County Court Judges' Criminal Court in and for the
-
4,270.
Clark v. City of Vancouver - (1904) 35 SCR 121 - 1904-06-08
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
William C. Clark (Plaintiff) Appellant; and The City of Vancouver (Defendant) Respondent.
-
4,271.
Ewing v. Dominion Bank - (1904) 35 SCR 133 - 1904-06-08
Supreme Court JudgmentsEvidence
William Ewing and J.H. Davidson (Defendants) Appellants; and The Dominion Bank (Plaintiffs) Respondents. [...] WILLIAM EWING & CO. To which Wallace answered as follows: [Page 158] [...] (Signed) WILLIAM EWING & Co. Wallace remained in the country for a week or two after the maturity of the note and then went to the
-
4,272.
Gervais v. McCarthy - (1904) 35 SCR 14 - 1904-05-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsAgency
Williams v. Wilcox ([5]); Bain v. Whitehaven & Furness Junction Railway Co. ([6]); Macdougall v. Knight ([7]); Guerin v. Fox ([8]); Low v. Gemley ([9]); Fuzier-Herman Art. 1341, no. 53; Duranton, t. 13, no. 308; Carrée & Chauveau, Procédure Civille, n. 976; Bonnier, édition Larnaude, no. 177; Bioche, Dictionnaire de
-
4,273.
SCR | RCS (1904) vol 34 - 1904-05-11
Canada Supreme Court ReportsCole v. Wade (8) ; Holliday v. Overton (9) ; Williams v. (1) 6 H. L. Cas. 61 at p. 106. [...] " Loading at Fort William " can therefore have one and only one meaning and that is loading at the elevators at Fort William. [...] Here, the ship was to load at Fort William on or before noon on the 5th of December.
-
4,274.
The King v. The "Kitty D." - (1904) 34 SCR 673 - 1904-05-04
Supreme Court JudgmentsFishery
For, as Sir William Scott afterwards said[3] on page 338: 'It is scarcely necessary to observe that a claim of territory is of a most sacred nature.
-
4,275.
Wood v. LeBlanc - (1904) 34 SCR 627 - 1904-05-04
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
The basis of the original attempt at appropriation of this unoccupied wild land was in claims to "wilderness rights" by Benjamin Scurr, Jabez Palmer and William Sears.