Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
2,369 result(s)
-
1,726.
Singer v. Singer - (1916) 52 SCR 447 - 1916-02-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
On the whole, I adopt the reasoning and conclusions of Chief Justice Sir William Meredith and would dismiss the appeal.
-
1,727.
Ritchie v. Jeffrey - (1915) 52 SCR 243 - 1915-11-29
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
The case of William Brandt's Sons & Co. v. Dunlop Rubber Co.[8], though not exactly covering this case, shews how in recent times the court is disposed to treat such claims as rest upon the doctrine relative to equitable assignment.
-
1,728.
Attorney-General For Canada v. Ritchie Contracting and Supply Co. - (1915) 52 SCR 78 - 1915-11-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
; Attorney-General for British Columbia v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co.[13] ; Fader v. Smith[14] ; Attorney-General for British Columbia v.Esquimalt and Nanaimo Railway Co.[15] ; Nash v. Newton[16] ; Lake Simcoe Ice and Cold Storage Co. v. McDonald[17] ; Rowe v. Smith[18] ; Nicholsom v. Williams[19] ; Hudson v. Tabor[20].
-
1,729.
Pearce v. Calgary (City) - (1915) 54 SCR 1 - 1915-07-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
William Pearce Appellant; and The City of Calgary Respondent 1915: 15 July. [...] One William Pearce, the owner of property in Calgary, Alta., having appealed respecting the assessment of his property there from the decision of the court of revision to the judge of the district court, and being dissatisfied with the decision rendered on that appeal, now desires to appeal direct therefrom to the Supreme
-
1,730.
Capital Life Assurance Co. of Canada v. Parker - (1915) 51 SCR 462 - 1915-06-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
Re William J. Parker. Dear Sir,—Your favour of the 24th instant received.
-
1,731.
Evangeline Fruit Co. v. Provincial Fire Ins. Co. of Canada - (1915) 51 SCR 474 - 1915-06-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
Moir v. Williams[14]. Neither do I think that the policy is avoided because of non-disclosure of the proximity of this supply of gasoline to the building under the condition requiring communication by the insured of all circumstances material to the risk.
-
1,732.
Greer v. Canadian Pacific Rway. Co. - (1915) 51 SCR 338 - 1915-05-04
Supreme Court JudgmentsTransportation
Solicitor for the appellant: William Laidlaw. Solicitors for the respondents: MacMurchy & Spence.
-
1,733.
Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Parent - (1915) 51 SCR 234 - 1915-03-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsTransportation
per Anglin J., at p. 585; British Columbia Electric Railway Co. v. Turner[7], per Davies J., at p. 479, Idington J., at p. 484, and Duff J., at p. 491; Williams v. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board[8]; Parker v. South Eastern Railway Co.[9]; Bergevin v. Quebec and Lake St. John Railway Co.[10]; Robertson v. Grand Trunk
-
1,734.
Peacock v. Wilkinson - (1915) 51 SCR 319 - 1915-03-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsSecurities
On the 3rd of June appellant concluded he could not get title to the property and “immediately took steps to re-purchase the property” from William Seller and succeeded in doing so at the price of $3,100.
-
1,735.
Price v. Chicoutimi Pulp Co. - (1915) 51 SCR 179 - 1915-03-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
William Price (Defendant) Appellant; and The Chicoutimi Pulp Company (Plaintiffs) Respondents. [...] Metropolitan Saloon and Omnibus Co. v. Hawkins[16]; South Hetton Coal Co. v. North Eastern News Association[17]; Mayor of Manchester v. Williams[18]; 18 Halsbury’s Laws of England, 612.
-
1,736.
Shajoo Ram v. The King - (1915) 51 SCR 392 - 1915-03-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
"5. At the trial before me Henry William Gwyther, a Hindu interpreter who was present in the proceedings before Magistrate South, and L.J. Ricketts, who
-
1,737.
Wood v. Grand Valley Rway. Co. - (1915) 51 SCR 283 - 1915-03-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
See last paragraph of judgment of Vaughan-Williams L.J., pages 792-3.
-
1,738.
Hughes v. Northern Electric and Manufacturing Co. - (1915) 50 SCR 626 - 1915-02-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
William Hughes and Another (Defendants) Appellants; and The Northern Electric and Manufacturing Company and Others (Plaintiffs) Respondents. [...] On motion the transfer of the stock of William Graem Mackechnie and William Hughes to Joseph Montgomery of $333,320 is hereby authorized and accepted. [...] On motion the transfer of one share by C.A. Bleecker to W.R. Williams, and one share from J.F. Wills to H.P. Edge was authorized and accepted.
-
1,739.
Phelan v. Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Co. - (1915) 51 SCR 113 - 1915-02-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsTransportation
This car formed part of a train made up at Fort William, in Ontario, but how long before the nineteenth of January, on the evening of which it came into the Melville yard, no one seems to know, or, indeed, to have cared. [...] There was ample evidence before the jury from which men of sense exercising common local knowledge might well have said all these things might, from its history, have happened to this car since it had got placed in train No. 91 at Fort William.
-
1,740.
The "A.L. Smith" and "Chinook" v. Ontario Gravel Freighting Co. - (1915) 51 SCR 39 - 1915-02-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsMaritime law
I have read the comments upon these decisions in the introduction to Williams and Bruce, Admiralty Practice, but whatever view may be taken by a court competent to reconsider the principles laid down by the Admiralty Courts of England as to Admiralty practice I think a proper deference to the opinions upon the points in [...] (But see the discussion of this question in the introduction to the third edition of Williams and Bruce on Admiralty Jurisdiction, at p. 18 et seq.) [...] See cases noted in Piggott on Foreign Judgments, 3rd ed., pp. 407-411; Re Morrison[65], and see Williams & Bruce Admiralty Jur. (1902) p. 86.
-
1,741.
Campbell Ford, Lake Ontario and Western Rway. Co. v. Massie - (1914) 50 SCR 409 - 1914-11-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsExpropriation
Justice Williams in the case of Re Hammond and Waterton[13], at p. 809.
-
1,742.
Morgan v. Dominion Permanent Loan Co. - (1914) 50 SCR 485 - 1914-11-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
Williams, some years later, left for parts unknown and (up to the trial) had not since been found. [...] Leighton, still later, is sworn by a clerk of his, who succeeded Williams, to have been much worried over some crooked dealings he had got into, either through Williams or otherwise, and ultimately died of brain disease in an asylum. [...] The applications for shares and for loan were apparently filled up by Williams.
-
1,743.
Canadian Northern Ontario Rway Co. v. Holditch - (1914) 50 SCR 265 - 1914-10-13
Supreme Court JudgmentsExpropriation
By this award the majority arbitrators awarded the respondent William Ernest Holditch the sum of $5,315 for the lands entirely taken by the railway. [...] The majority arbitrators found as a fact appearing on the face of the award that the following additional lands of William Ernest Holditch, namely, lots (numbers), in the subdivision, [...] As a result of the judgment in the Fort William Case12, the “Railway Act” was amended so as to enable the adjacent abutting land-owners to receive compensation when the railway passes along or across a street.
-
1,744.
Cartwright v. City of Toronto - (1914) 50 SCR 215 - 1914-06-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsTaxation
Solicitor for the respondent: William Johnston. [1] 29 Ont. L.R. 73.
-
1,745.
Mathewson v. Burns - (1914) 50 SCR 115 - 1914-06-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
William A. Burns (Defendant) Respondent. 1914: June 2, 19. Present: Sir Charles Fitzpatrick C.J. and Idington, Duff, Anglin and Brodeur JJ.
-
1,746.
Beamish v. Richardson & Sons - (1914) 49 SCR 595 - 1914-05-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsSecurities
William E. Beamish (Defendant) Appellant; and James Richardson & Sons, Limited (Plaintiffs) Respondents.
-
1,747.
Hitchcock v. Sykes - (1914) 49 SCR 403 - 1914-03-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsSale
See also the judgment of Vaughan Williams L.J., at pp. 253-4. Indeed, while I do not rest my judgment on such a finding, from the facts established it would seem to be a legitimate inference that, when closing the transaction with Webster in the solicitor’s office at Cornwall, the Hitchcocks were aware that he was ignorant
-
1,748.
The King v. Trudel - (1914) 49 SCR 501 - 1914-03-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsExpropriation
The law of Canada as regards the principles upon which compensation for land taken was to be awarded was the same as the law of England, and it has been explained in numerous cases— nowhere with greater precision than in the case of In re Lucas and Chesterfield Gas and Water Board[2], where Lord Justices Vaughan Williams
-
1,749.
British Columbia Electric Railway Co. v. Turner - (1914) 49 SCR 470 - 1914-02-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
Co. (2 B. & S. 759; 4 B. & S. 396); Williams v. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board ((1905), 1 K.B. 804); Erdman v. Walkerton (20 Ont. App. R. 444), and Johnson v. Grand Trunk Rway. [...] Co. (19 Ont. App. R. 693); Markey v. Tolworth Joint Isolation Hospital District ((1900) 2 K.B. 454), and Williams v. Mersey Dock and Harbour Board ( (1905) 1 K.B. 804), referred to. [...] Railway Co.[3]; Griffiths v. Earl of Dudley[4] ; Williams v. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board[5].
-
1,750.
Snell v. Brickles - (1914) 49 SCR 360 - 1914-02-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsSale
William H. Snell (Plaintiff) Appellant; and Charlotte Brickles, Executor of The Estate of Isaac Brickles, Deceased (Defendant) Respondent. [...] edition of Dart, Vendors and Purchasers, or in Williams’ Vendors and Purchasers, or in Halsbury under Specific Performance or Sale of Land and in Talbot and Fort’s Index only two references are noted, both in 1900, it was not mentioned either in Wallis v. Smith[14] or in Howe v. Smith[15] was correctly appreciated (i.e., in [...] On the 20th February, 1912, by accepting a written offer of purchase from William H. Snell, Isaac Brickles agreed to sell to him, for $7,500, certain land in the Township of Scarborough.