Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
4,782 result(s)
-
3,751.
Ukrainian Greek Orthodox Church of Canada et al. v. The Trustees of Ukrainian Greek Orthodox Cathedral of St. Mary the Protectress et al. - [1940] SCR 586 - 1940-06-29
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
On this point it is sufficient to refer to In the Matter of the Petition of Complaint of the Right Rev. John William Colenso, D.D., Lord Bishop of Natal, a decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council2. [...] The particular extract to which I desire to draw attention is set out in Merriman v. Williams3.
-
3,752.
Workmen's Compensation Board v. Theed - [1940] SCR 553 - 1940-06-29
Supreme Court JudgmentsLabour law
In fact, as Lord Justice Atkin in Williams v. Guest[51], he had already said:—
-
3,753.
Christie et al. v. Edwards - [1940] SCR 410 - 1940-05-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
William L. Christie, I. Huntly Christie, Katherine Christie and Emma L. Christie, suing on behalf of themselves and all other shareholders of Erwik Estates Limited of record in the year 1932 other than the defendant George Edwards (Plaintiffs) Appellants; [...] The plaintiffs are William L. Christie, I. Huntly Christie, Katharine Christie and Emma L. Christie, suing on behalf of themselves and all other shareholders of Erwik Estates Limited of record in the year 1932, other than the defendant George Edwards, and the said George Edwards is the sole defendant. [...] In his statement of defence he alleged that before the date of that meeting he informed the plaintiffs William L. Christie and I. Huntly Christie of his opinion that, if the Company were wound up, its assets distributed among the shareholders, and the Company dissolved, all prospective claims for taxes and for all legal
-
3,754.
Magazine Repeating Razor Company of Canada Ltd. et al. v. Shick Shaver Ltd. - [1940] SCR 465 - 1940-05-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsIntellectual property
William H. Crawford To the Minister of Trade and Commerce, Ottawa, Ontario.
-
3,755.
National Electric Products Corporation v. Industrial Electric Products Ltd. - [1940] SCR 406 - 1940-05-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsIntellectual property
There is no evidence of agency or of partnership and on the facts one could not properly find, to borrow the language of Vaughan Williams L.J. in Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co., Ltd., v. David Moseley & Sons, Ltd.[2], any relation between the parties of " principals in the first degree" or of "aider and abettor."
-
3,756.
Home Oil Distributors Ltd. et al. v. Attorney-General of British Columbia et al. - [1940] SCR 444 - 1940-04-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Kerwin J.—The plaintiffs (appellants) brought action against the Attorney-General of British Columbia, Coal and Petroleum Control Board, and Dr. William Alexander Carrothers (the sole member of the Board), for a declaration that the Coal and Petroleum Products Control Board Act of British Columbia (chapter 8 of the statutes
-
3,757.
Reference as to the Legislative Competence of the Parliament of Canada to Enact Bill No. 9 of the Fourth Session, Eighteenth Parliament of Canada, Entitled "An Act to Amend the Supreme Court Act" - [1940] SCR 49 - 1940-01-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
of Canada Imperial Orders in Council, made under the provisions of the Judicial Committee Act, 1933, 3 & 4 William IV, c. 41, and the Judicial Committee Act, 1844, c. 69, of the Imperial Statutes, 7 & 8 Vict., which provide for direct appeals from the judgments of the Supreme and other courts of the several [...] In 1833 there was passed an Act of the Imperial Parliament, 3-4 William IV, chap. 41, entitled An Act for the better administration of justice in His Majesty's Privy Council, later given the short title of The Judicial Committee Act, 1833.
-
3,758.
Trottier v. Rajotte - [1940] SCR 203 - 1939-12-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsFamily law
There was an appeal to the Privy Council which was dismissed[3]; and the. judgment of the Board delivered by Sir Barnes Peacock implies that the rules for determination of international domicile do not differ from the generally recognized rules which are fully stated and illustrated in the judgment of Sir William Ritchie in
-
3,759.
The King v. Hochelaga Shipping & Towing Co. Ltd. - [1940] SCR 153 - 1939-12-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
The learned judge found that the work, presenting, as Captain Williams says, the appearance of a new wharf, but with the sunken crib work projecting from it without a sign of its presence, constituted a trap. [...] The mate remarked that they had struck something and Williams sent him down to the chief engineer to see if there were any leaks or if anything was wrong below. [...] Williams jumped up immediately and saw that the boat was down by the bow.
-
3,760.
SCR | RCS [1939] - 1939-10-30
Canada Supreme Court ReportsSolicitor for the appellant: William A. MacRae. Solicitor for the respondent: William J. P. O'Meara. [...] Vaughan Williams, L.J., in the course of his reported reasons, said: There are cases, no doubt, where the Ioss is so dependent on the mere unrestricted volition of another that it is impossible to say that there is any assessable loss resulzing from the breach. [...] These were divided and are held as follows: Robert Wilkinson 1,300 shares Clarence E. Snyder (the appellant) 800 shares William S. Applegate 800 shares Fred Elves 550 shares So far as appears, those are the only shares of the capital stock of the company issued and outstanding.
-
3,761.
Windsor Board of Education v. Ford Motor Co. of Canada Ltd. et al. - [1939] SCR 412 - 1939-10-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsTaxation
The article on Evidence in the Hailsham edition of Halsbury’s Laws of England (Vol. XIII) which was under the editorship of Lord Roche, has left untouched the carefully guarded statement in the article on Evidence, in the first edition, which was under the joint editorship of Mr. Hume-Williams and Mr. Phipson.
-
3,762.
Kinkel et al. v. Hyman - [1939] SCR 364 - 1939-10-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
Torts
As Vaughan Williams, L.J., points out, the average chance of each competitor was one in four. [...] Vaughan Williams, L.J., in the course of his reported reasons, said:
-
3,763.
Snyder v. Minister of National Revenue - [1939] SCR 384 - 1939-06-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsTaxation
William Anderson ............. Calgary Power Co., Calgary .... 1⁄2 Unit [...] William S. Applegate ..................................................... 800 shares
-
3,764.
Robinson v. The Royal Trust Co. - [1939] SCR 75 - 1938-12-12
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
In Barford v. Street[5], Sir William Grant had to consider a will by which the residue of the testator's personal estate and all his real estate were given and devised to a trustee to pay the rents, issues, interests, dividends, and produce, to Mary Barford during the term of her natural life, and from and immediately after [...] But the reasons for the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, delivered by Sir William Meredith[14], are of interest as indicating the view of the Chief Justice of Ontario that, notwithstanding the intention of the testator that beneficiaries should take a life 2state, that estate, when coupled with a general power [...] Sir William Meredith disagreed with this view because of the words "they my said daughters in the meantime to have all the rents and profits therefrom" and held that the daughters took a life interest with a general power of appointment.
-
3,765.
SCR | RCS [1938] - 1938-12-05
Canada Supreme Court ReportsE. K. Williams K.C. for the respondent. (1) 44 Man. R. 256; [1936] 2 W.W.R. 650; [1936] 4 D.L.R. 208. [...] WILLIAM MANCHUK APPELLANT ; 1938 AND * June 13, 14. HIS MAJESTY THE KING RESPONDENT. * June 23. [...] Solicitor for the Attorney-General of Ontario: William B. Common. Attorney-General of Manitoba: W. J. Major.
-
3,766.
Vanity Fair Silk Mills v. Commissioner of Patents - [1939] SCR 245 - 1938-12-05
Supreme Court JudgmentsIntellectual property
Solicitor for the appellant: William A. MacRae. Solicitor for the respondent: William J. P. O’Meara.
-
3,767.
The King v. Barbour - [1938] SCR 465 - 1938-11-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
In Reg. v. Mobbs[20], it is reported in (1853) 6 Cox C.C. 223 and in 17 J.P. 713, that Baron Cresswell and Williams J., in a case where evidence was offered of a prior assault, felt so uncertain about the matter that they decided not to admit the evidence. [...] At the famous trial of William Palmer, 1856[23], one question was as to whether the accused administered the poison. [...] [23] Reporter’s note.—See in series of “Notable British Trials,” the “Trial of William Palmer” (Knott and Watson) at pp. 297, 299.
-
3,768.
Manchuk v. The King - [1938] SCR 341 - 1938-06-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
William Manchuk (Plaintiff) Appellant; and His Majesty The King (Defendant) Respondent. [...] THE CHIEF JUSTICE.—On the 8th of June, 1936, the appellant William Manchuk killed, first, John Seabright, and, shortly afterwards, his wife, Amy Seabright.
-
3,769.
Reference Re Authority to Perform Functions Vested by Adoption Act, The Children of Unmarried Parents Act, The Deserted Wives' and Children's Maintenance Act of Ontario - [1938] SCR 398 - 1938-06-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Solicitor for the Attorney-General of Ontario: William B. Common. Attorney-General of Manitoba: W. J. Major.
-
3,770.
Wilson v. The King - [1938] SCR 317 - 1938-06-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
But Sir William Grant, the Master of the Rolls, at p. 481 said this:—
-
3,771.
Davis v. Auld et al. - [1938] SCR 304 - 1938-04-26
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
Williams on Executors, page 272:— With respect to an administrator, the general rule is, that a party entitled to administration can do nothing as administrator before letters of administration are granted to him; inasmuch as he derives his authority entirely from the appointment of the Court. [...] In Williams on Executors, at page 275, it is stated: — Though a next of kin may have intermeddled with the effects, and made himself liable as executor de son tort, he cannot be compelled by the Court to take upon himself the office of administrator.
-
3,772.
Governor and Company of Adventurers of England Trading into Hudson's Bay v. Wyrzykowski - [1938] SCR 278 - 1938-04-26
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
E. K. Williams K.C. for the respondent. [Page 282] The Chief Justice.—I concur in the conclusion as well as in the reasoning of my brother Hudson as well as those of my brother Davis, but I desire to add one or two observations upon the points raised as to the admissibility of the permits and of the report of the inspector
-
3,773.
Thomson v. Lambert - [1938] SCR 253 - 1938-03-25
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
(Williams v. Hunt, [1905] 1 K.B. 512, at 514, Macdougall v. Knight, 25 Q.B.D. 1, at 10, and others cases, cited). [...] to the Imperial News Company Limited of Winnipeg and to William James Sinnott, the manager of that company, and to various employees of that company including one Richard Halliley. [...] Collins, M.R. (with whom Stirling, L.J., concurred) in Williams v. Hunt[1], said:—
-
3,774.
In re Bankruptcy of Stobie, Forlong & Company - [1938] SCR 193 - 1938-03-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsBankruptcy and insolvency
Vaughan Williams, L.J., was of opinion that the onus of showing that the proof was sworn by inadvertence had not been satisfied. [...] As has already been mentioned, the title-deeds were in the hands of a third party and it is quite evident, as Vaughan Williams, L.J., points out in supplemental reasons, at page 238, “that an order giving leave to amend or withdraw the proof would under the circumstances be illusory.”
-
3,775.
Reference Re Alberta Statutes - The Bank Taxation Act; The Credit of Alberta Regulation Act; and the Accurate News and Information Act - [1938] SCR 100 - 1938-03-04
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
6. That in a submission set forth in a letter of October 12th, 1937, to the Right Honourable the Prime Minister of Canada, the Honourable William Aberhart, Premier of the Government of the province of Alberta, stated, with reference to said Bill No. 8: " Should there be any doubt as to the constitutional validity of the