Advanced Search
- All Databases (2,511)
- Decisions (1,094)
- Resources (1,417)
2,511 result(s)
-
2,176.
Home Appliances Mfg. Co. v. The Oneida Community - [1923] SCR 570 - 1923-12-31
Supreme Court JudgmentsIntellectual property
W. L. Scott K.C. for the respondent. The word "Community" has become so identified with respondent's goods that any use of it by other manufacturers is calculated to deceive. [...] W. L. Scott K.C. for the respondent. The Chief Justice.—I am of the opinion that this appeal should be dismissed with costs. [...] Solicitors for the respondent: Ewart, Scott, Kelley & Kelley. [1] [1923] Ex. C.R. 44.
-
2,177.
SCR | RCS [1923] - 1923-12-31
Canada Supreme Court ReportsH. J. Scott K.C. for the appellant. W. L. Scott K.C. for the respondent. [...] Quebec R.L.H. & P. Co. v. Vandry ([1920] A.C. 662) and City of Montreal v. Watt & Scott ([1922] 2 A.C. 555) followed. [...] Payton & Co. v. Snelling, Lampard & Co. Lambert Pharmacal Co. v. J. Palmer & Sons W. L. Scott K.C. for the respondent.
-
2,178.
Lukey v. Ruthenian Farmer's Elevator Co., Ltd - [1924] SCR 56 - 1923-12-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
The evil aimed at by the legislation now claimed to be ultra vires existed long ago, as exemplified by the case of Scott v. Brown, Doering, McNab & Co.[25], and certainly needed a remedy within the powers of each local legislature where the evil existed.
-
2,179.
Reid v. Linnell - [1923] SCR 594 - 1923-06-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
In Scott v. The Fernie Lumber Co.[10], a decision pronounced in 1904, it was held by the full court that this enactment, which was then s. 66 of the Supreme Court Act, of 1904, had not wholly repealed the rule that a litigant is bound by the way in which he conducts his case at the trial, and that nothing in the section [...] Since that decision, s. 66 has been reenacted at least once without alteration, and as far as I am aware the principle laid down in Scott v. The Fernie Lumber Co.[11] has been acted upon by the British Columbia courts down to the present time.
-
2,180.
St. Paul Lumber Co. v. British Crown Assurance Corporation - [1923] SCR 515 - 1923-05-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
I concur in the reasons for the judgment of the Appellate Division delivered by Mr. Justice Hyndman and concurred in by Chief Justice Scott, which clearly express my own views.
-
2,181.
City of Montreal v. Lesage - [1923] SCR 355 - 1923-04-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsMunicipal law
Quebec R.L.H. & P. Co. v. Vandry ([1920] A.C. 662) and The City of Montreal v. Watt & Scott ([1922] 2 A.C. 555) followed; and in order to bring itself within the exculpatory clause of article 1054 C.C., it is not sufficient for the appellant to prove that the cause of the bursting is unknown. [...] Et dans une cause encore plus récente, décidée par le conseil privé, savoir celle de City of Montreal v. Watt & Scott[8], le conseil privé a maintenu le principe qu'il avait énoncé dans la cause de Vandry (2), en y ajoutant cependant ceci:— [...] Since the judgment of the Court of King's Bench was rendered, their Lordships of the Judicial Committee in City of Montreal v. Watt & Scott, Limited[11], explained the meaning of their decision in the Vandry Case (1), and said at p. 563:—
-
2,182.
Riordon Co. v. Danforth Co. - [1923] SCR 319 - 1923-04-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
Duff J.—In the fall of 1921 the appellant company became financially embarrassed; and on the 11th October of the same year the company requested Mr. Scott, an authorized trustee in bankruptcy, to call a meeting of its creditors to enable it to submit a proposal for an extension of credit, the proposal being that credit
-
2,183.
The Governor and Company of Gentlemen Adventurers of England v. Vaillancourt - [1923] SCR 414 - 1923-04-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
City of Montreal v. Watt & Scott Ltd.[9] I doubt myself if exposition could make the meaning of the language used in either text plainer than it is.
-
2,184.
SCR | RCS (1923) vol 64 - 1923-01-01
Canada Supreme Court ReportsSchwersenski v. Vineberg Scott & Brown, Doering McNab Co. Scottish Navigation Co. v. Souter.... [...] I should have thought that the doctrine of de facto applied to any officer would relieve any person so embarrassed and should be surprised if any one thought of applying to any one else than Chief Justice Scott. [...] Notice of the hearing under this reference was given by order of the court to the Hon. Horace Harvey and to the Hon. David Lynch Scott, as well to the Attorney-General of Alberta.
-
2,185.
City of Port Coquitlam v. Wilson - [1923] SCR 235 - 1922-12-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
the accident is such as in the ordinary course of things does not happen if those who have the management use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of explanation by the defendant, that the event arose from want of care on the part of the defendant (see Scott v. London and St. Katherine Docks Co.[17]. [...] Erle C.J., in Scott v. London & St. Katherine Dock Co.[29], and are generally considered as expressing the rule res ipsa loquitur. [...] Inasmuch as by law the person in whose premises a fire begins is liable for the damage it causes to neighbouring property unless he shews that it began accidentally, no prejudice could be caused by stating to the jury the rule in the terms of Scott v. London & St. Katherine Dock Co.[30], which is very largely to the
-
2,186.
Shaw v. Masson - [1923] SCR 187 - 1922-12-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
H.J. Scott K.C. for the appellant. W.L. Scott K.C. for the respondent. [...] Solicitors for the respondent: Ewart, Scott, Kelley & Kelley. [1] 10 Ves. 292.
-
2,187.
Canadian Vickers Ltd. v. Smith - [1923] SCR 203 - 1922-11-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Quebec R.L.H. & P. Co. v. Vandry ([1920] A.C. 662) and City of Montreal v. Watt & Scott ([1922] 2 A.C. 555) followed. [...] —which, as their Lordships' later judgment in City of Montreal v. Watt & Scott[7], explains, implies "unable by reasonable means." [...] Scott Case[11], in addition to the views they had ex-pressed in the Vandry Case[12], their Lordships stated that
-
2,188.
MacDonald v. Pier - [1923] SCR 107 - 1922-11-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
Under these circumstances the plaintiff comes before this court without offering any assurance, or even alleging, that, if the case be sent back for a new trial, any evidence different from or in addition to that adduced at the original trial before Mr. Justice Scott will be forthcoming. [...] He did not even state that he was instructed that the evidence at the new trial would in any respect differ from that passed upon by Mr. Justice Scott.
-
2,189.
La Ville St-Michel v. Shannon Realties Ltd. - (1922) 64 SCR 420 - 1922-10-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsMunicipal law
plan étaient, depuis deux ou trois ans avant l’action, cultivées comme le restant de la terre, car le tout, à l'exception de ce qui a été vendu, est loué au fermier, un nommé Scott, qui l'occupe et le cultive depuis une trentaine d'années, pour un loyer annuel de $225.00.
-
2,190.
Major v. Canadian Pacific Railway - (1922) 64 SCR 367 - 1922-06-17
Supreme Court JudgmentsTransportation
The plaintiff is, therefore, in establishing his cause of action, obliged to invoke an illegal act in which he participated and consequently cannot maintain his action; Simpson v. Bloss[5]; Taylor v. Chester[6]; Scott v. Brown.
-
2,191.
SCR | RCS (1922) vol 63 - 1922-05-31
Canada Supreme Court ReportsWatt & Scott Ltd. v. City of Montreal (60 Can. S.C.R. 523). Appeal dismissed with costs, Aug. 3, 1922. [...] Schmidt v. Miller Scott v. London and St. Katherine H. & C. 596 Dock Co Sénécal v. Edison Electric Co.. [...] See Scott v. London and St. Katherine Dock Co. (2). McLean v. Rhodes Curry & Co. (3).
-
2,192.
In Re The Chief Justice of Alberta - (1922) 64 SCR 135 - 1922-05-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsStatutes
To the second question:—The letters patent of the 15th September, 1921, nominating Honourable Mr. Scott Chief Justice of Alberta are wholly ineffective. [...] On the same day, the 15th September, 1921, the Governor General, by commission under the Great Seal of Canada, appointed the Honourable David Lynch Scott described as [...] Notice of the hearing under this reference was given by order of the court to the Hon. Horace Harvey and to the Hon. David Lynch Scott, as well to the Attorney-General of Alberta.
-
2,193.
SCR | RCS (1922) vol 62 - 1922-01-01
Canada Supreme Court ReportsIt was hired by them, although Scott was the one who acted for his companions as well as for himself in hiring it. [...] It was they who entrusted the driving to Scott. In my opinion, the Bernina case (2) has no application if Scott in driving the motor-car was acting as the agent or servant of his companions. [...] RAILWAY CO. V. HATFIELD Potatoes were shipped from Hartland, N.B., for AND SCOTT LIMITED. carriage by the appellant to New York.
-
2,194.
Wolfe v. The King / Powers v. The King - (1921) 63 SCR 141 - 1921-12-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsState
See Scott v. London and St. Katherine Dock Co.[2]. McLean v. Rhodes Curry & Co.[3].
-
2,195.
Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Hatfield and Scott Ltd. - (1921) 62 SCR 524 - 1921-11-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsTransportation
Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Hatfield and Scott Ltd., , (1921) 62 SCR 524 [...] Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Hatfield and Scott Ltd., (1921) 62 S.C.R. 524 [...] Hatfield and Scott, Limited (Plaintiff) Respondent. 1921: October 18; 1921: November 21.
-
2,196.
Kerrigan v. Harrison - (1921) 62 SCR 374 - 1921-10-11
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
H.J. Scott K.C. and McEvoy for the respondent, cited Haywood v. Brunswick Permanent Building Soc.[7]; Andrew v. Aitken[8]; Austerberry v. Oldham[9].
-
2,197.
Samuel v. Black Lake Asbestos and Chrome Co. - (1921) 62 SCR 472 - 1921-10-11
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
H.J. Scott K.C. and R.S. Cassels K.C. for the respondents referred to British Westinghouse Electric Co. v. Underground Electric Railways Co.[4]
-
2,198.
Collins v. The King - (1921) 62 SCR 154 - 1921-06-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
It is not within our province, as was held by a majority of this court in the recent case of Scott v. The King (24th of Feb., 1921), materially to modify, qualify or enlarge the scope of a question in a reserved case merely because it does not cover the ground of appeal which counsel presents to the court, although that
-
2,199.
The Canadian Pacific Railway Company v. Smith - (1921) 62 SCR 134 - 1921-06-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
It was hired by them, although Scott was the one who acted for his companions as well as for himself in hiring it. [...] It was they who entrusted the driving to Scott. In my opinion, the Bernina case[8] has no application if Scott in driving the motor-car was acting as the agent or servant of his companions.
-
2,200.
SCR | RCS (1921) vol 61 - 1921-03-11
Canada Supreme Court ReportsScott & Co. (1), whom the Court of Appeal refused to hold liable for damages. [...] THE MONTIOELLO STATE BANK. W. L. Scott for the appellant. A. B. Hogg for the respondent. [...] Scott v. The London and Anglin J. St. Katherine Docks Co. (1); Flannery v. Waterford and Limerick Rly. Co. (2).