Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
2,369 result(s)
-
701.
Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents) - 2002 SCC 76 - [2002] 4 SCR 45 - 2002-12-05
Supreme Court JudgmentsIntellectual property
Hayhurst, William L. “Exclusive Rights in Relation to Living Things” (1991), 6 I.P.J. 171. [...] William J. Sammon, for the interveners Canadian Council of Churches and Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. [...] I agree with William Hayhurst when he writes: Some patents for processes may be of little practical value.
-
702.
Boucher v. the King - [1951] SCR 265 - 1950-12-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
I think the change that took place following the accession to the Throne of William and Mary in 1688 bears upon the present question. [...] While it was not so declared in the Bill of Rights, from the time William III came to the Throne the commissions of the judges were by their terms to endure during their good behaviour and not merely at the King's pleasure, and this was expressly provided by the "Act for the Limitation of the Crown and Better Securing the [...] The last of the Irish cases to which I have referred is The Queen v. McHugh[62], where the accused was charged with publishing a wicked, scandalous and malicious libel of and concerning the administration of justice, intending to bring it into contempt and to scandalize and vilify William Drennan Andrews (Andrews, J.) and,
-
703.
R. v. Briscoe - 2010 SCC 13 - [2010] 1 SCR 411 - 2010-04-08
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Williams, Glanville. Criminal Law: The General Part, 2nd ed. London: Stevens & Sons, 1961. [...] Glanville Williams explains the key restriction on the doctrine: The rule that wilful blindness is equivalent to knowledge is essential, and is found throughout the criminal law.
-
704.
John Doe v. Bennett - 2004 SCC 17 - [2004] 1 SCR 436 - 2004-03-25
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
William J. Sammon, for the intervener the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops. [...] Solicitors for the respondent/appellant on cross-appeal, John Doe: Williams, Roebothan, McKay & Marshall, St. John’s.
-
705.
R. v. Braich - 2002 SCC 27 - [2002] 1 SCR 903 - 2002-03-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
William B. Smart, Q.C., for the respondent Sukhminder Braich. The judgment of the Court was delivered by [...] Solicitors for the respondent Sukhminder Braich: Smart and Williams, Vancouver.
-
706.
R. v. Wells - [1998] 2 SCR 517 - 1998-09-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
10 Hinds J.A. (Williams J.A. concurring) reviewed the evidence and concluded that, in this case, it would appear on a subjective basis that the respondent may well have believed that G.D. was capable of his “arrest” and had some degree of power over him. [...] 12 In a separate judgment, McEachern C.J. (Williams J.A. concurring) added that, if it had been argued, he would also have excluded the statements made by the respondent under the threat of physical violence as they failed the test for reliability.
-
707.
Dersch v. Canada (Attorney General) - [1990] 2 SCR 1505 - 1990-11-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
S.C.R. 000; Lyons v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 633; R. v. Playford (1987), 40 C.C.C. (3d) 142; R. v. Parmar (1987), 34 C.C.C. (3d) 260; R. v. Williams (1985), 44 C.R. (3d) 351; R. v. Hunter (1987), 34 C.C.C. (3d) 14; R. v. Garofoli, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 000; R. v. Lachance, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 000; R. v. Zito, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 000. [...] (See R. v. Williams (1985), 44 C.R. (3d) 351 (Ont. C.A.).) But it does provide, in my view, that the accused be given the opportunity to test the admissibility of a piece of evidence according to the ordinary rules that govern the admissibility of the evidence.
-
708.
Bruce v. McIntyre - [1955] SCR 251 - 1955-01-25
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
C.L. Dubin, Q.C. and William Schreiber, Q.C. for the appellants. G.N. Shaver, Q.C. for the respondent. [...] Solicitor for the appellants: William Schreiber. Solicitors for the respondent: Shaver, Paulin & Branscombe.
-
709.
Schara Tzedeck v. Royal Trust Co. - [1953] 1 SCR 31 - 1952-10-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
In Williams on Executors, 12th Ed. p. 610, the learned author says that if the deceased has left directions as to the disposal of his body, though these are not legally binding on the personal representative, effect should be given to his wishes as far as is possible. [...] in a Jewish cemetery in which the testatrix had her own burial plot, but this statement is not supported by authority (Williams, 12th Ed. p. 610: 3 Hals. p. 457).
-
710.
Cullen v. The King - [1949] SCR 658 - 1949-05-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
William Clarence Cullen (Plaintiff) Appellant; and His Majesty the King (Defendant) Respondent. [...] In the case of an appeal by a convicted person, a failure on the part of his counsel to object to the admissibility of material evidence was held not to prejudice his right of appeal from a conviction in Rex v. William Stirland[2].
-
711.
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.
-
712.
Holland Canada Mortgage Co. v. Hutchings - [1936] SCR 165 - 1936-03-31
Supreme Court JudgmentsGuarantee and suretyship
Know all men by these presents, that we, William George Hunt, manager; Robert John Hutchings, manager; Absalom Judson Sayre, manager; Archibald John McArthur, gentleman; George Thomas Calendar Robinson, merchant; Albert William Ward, merchant; George Allan Anderson, physician; John Niblock, superintendent; John Edward
-
713.
May, SS. v. The King - [1931] SCR 374 - 1931-04-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsFishery
In The Eleanor[1], Sir William Scott said: Real and irresistible distress must be at all times a sufficient passport for human beings under any such application of human laws. [...] “Nothing less,” says Sir William Scott, “than an uncontrollable necessity, which admits of no compromise, and cannot be resisted,” will be held a justification of the offence.
-
714.
Herron v. Mayland - [1928] SCR 225 - 1928-03-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
William Stewart Herron (Plaintiff) Appellant; and Albert Henry Mayland and Royalite Oil Company, Limited (Defendants) Respondents [...] Williams v. Owen[6]. And where, in the documents they have executed, the parties have clearly explained that such is the character of their transaction, it requires powerful collateral evidence to overcome the presumption that the record is a faithful one.
-
715.
Rioux v. Saint Lawrence Terminal Co. - (1908) 40 SCR 98 - 1908-03-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
We also rely upon the decisions in Williams v. Châteauvert[7]; McCormick v. Simpson[8]; Cadrain v. Theberge[9]; and Breakey v. Bilodeau[10]. [...] I have not overlooked the reference to Williams v. Chàteauvert[13], upon which the trial judge relies, but I cannot see what bearing that case could have on the question at issue here.
-
716.
Norton v. Fulton - (1907) 39 SCR 202 - 1907-06-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Thomas Norton (Plaintiff) Appellant; and The Honourable Frederick Fulton (Defendant) Respondent [...] Williams v. Stephenson[25]. But while I think the learned judge was right in withdrawing the case from the jury, I think the judgment on the main issue should have been for the plaintiff.
-
717.
Hood v. Eden - (1905) 36 SCR 476 - 1905-06-26
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
We and each of us hereby nominate and appoint William Moffatt Cram our attorney and trustee, to acquire and hold for our and each of our use and benefit, the property owned by William Oelschlager, and the property owned by Henry Oelschlager, of Baden, and any other property owned by Oelschlager Brothers, of Baden, the said
-
718.
Slater v. Badenach - (1884) 10 SCR 296 - 1884-06-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
William Badenach (Plaintiff) Respondent. 1884: March 19; 1884: June 23. [...] The learned counsel referred also to the following cases: Nicholson v. Leavett[4]; In re Swoyer’s Appeal[5]; Porter v. William[6]; Mussey v. Noyes[7]; Sutton v. Hanford[8]; Pierce v. Brewster[9]; Barney v. Griffin[10]; Hutchinson v. Lord[11].
-
719.
Caverhill v. Robillard - (1878) 2 SCR 575 - 1878-06-04
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
PRESENT—Sir William Buell Richards, Knt., C. J., and Ritchie, Strong, Taschereau, Fournier and Henry, J. J. [...] Moreover, the evidence of Alexander Parker, William Henderson, Frederick Ward and James Linch clearlv establishes the fact that by means of this wharf the Appellants derived an annual revenue of $200 to $300.
-
720.
R. v. Schneider - 2022 SCC 34 - 2022-10-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
William Victor Schneider Respondent Coram: Wagner C.J. and Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Côté, Brown, Rowe, Martin, Kasirer and Jamal JJ. [...] William Victor Schneider Respondent Indexed as: R. v. Schneider 2022 SCC 34 [...] [3] The police charged the respondent, William Victor Schneider (“accused”), with second degree murder and interfering with a dead body contrary to ss. 235(1) and 182 (b) of the Criminal Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 .
-
721.
Vancouver Sun (Re) - 2004 SCC 43 - [2004] 2 SCR 332 - 2004-06-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Edinburgh: William Tait, 1843. APPEAL from a judgment of the British Columbia Supreme Court, [2003] B.C.J. No. 1992 (QL), 2003 BCSC 1330, dismissing an application for access to the proceedings and for a declaration that proceedings should not be in camera. [...] William B. Smart, Q.C., and Brock Martland, for the respondent Ripudaman Singh Malik. [...] Solicitors for the respondent Ripudaman Singh Malik: Smart & Williams, Vancouver.
-
722.
Musqueam Indian Band v. Glass - 2000 SCC 52 - [2000] 2 SCR 633 - 2000-11-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsAboriginal law
Evelyn M. Murray, William T. Ziemba, James R. Thompson, Ann B. Thompson, Yum C. Lau, Irene Lau, [...] William N. King, Allan J. Hunter, Grace K. Hunter, Grace Ng, Irving Glassner, Noreen G. Glassner, [...] Megarry, Robert Edgar, and William Wade. The Law of Real Property, 6th ed.
-
723.
Bank of Montreal v. Hall - [1990] 1 SCR 121 - 1990-02-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Financial institutions
Moodie, William. "Accounts Receivable, Section 88 Of the Bank Act, And Inventory Financing ‑‑ A Banker's View", Meredith Memorial Lectures, 1967 Series, McGill University Faculty of Law. Security in Moveable Property. [...] Moull, William D. "Security Under Sections 177 and 178 of the Bank Act" (1986), 65 Can. Bar Rev. 242. [...] William Softley and Dale Doan, for the appellant. Gary Semenchuck, Q.C., for the respondent.
-
724.
International Power Co. v. McMaster University / In re Porto Rico Power Co. - [1946] SCR 178 - 1946-01-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
The true nature of the fund in dispute is, I think, nowhere better expressed than in the reasons for judgment of Mr. Justice Eve in In re William Metcalfe & Sons, Ld.[13], where he says:— [...] The reasoning in Williams v. Renshaw[15] to which we were referred, seems to overlook this distinction. [...] It was there held that the question whether a liquidator ought to divide and distribute the surplus assets amongst the holders of the ordinary shares alone, or amongst the holders of the preference shares and the holders of the ordinary shares pari passu, was governed by the decision In re William Metcalfe & Sons
-
725.
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.