Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
2,369 result(s)
-
1,851.
Paskivski v. Canadian Pacific Ltd. - [1976] 1 SCR 687 - 1975-04-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Canadian Pacific Limited (formerly known as Canadian Pacific Railway Company), Wilfred Cook, Charles Marsden, William Pederson and Nestor Stanko (Defendants) Respondents;
-
1,852.
Henwood v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America - [1967] SCR 720 - 1967-10-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
One William Clark, an agent for the respondent insurance company, had issued certain policies in connection with the appellant’s family and called at the house on frequent occasions to collect premiums.
-
1,853.
Guaranty Trust Company of Canada v. Minister of National Revenue - [1967] SCR 133 - 1966-12-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsTaxation
Solicitors for the appellant: McMaster, Steele, McKinnon, MacKenzie & Collins-Williams, Toronto.
-
1,854.
Labour Relations Board v. Traders' Service Ltd. - [1958] SCR 672 - 1958-10-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsLabour law
Solicitors for the appellants Attorney-General of British Columbia and the Board: Paine, Edmonds, Mercer & Williams, Vancouver.
-
1,855.
Bouck v. Minister of National Revenue - [1952] 2 SCR 17 - 1952-03-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsTaxation
Here, to adapt the language of Sir William Meredith, at page 611 of 33 O.L.R., the appellant was entitled to receive the income, subject to an obligation on her part to maintain and educate the children out of it but leaving to her discretion the manner in and the extent to which provision should be made for any child, a
-
1,856.
Asconi Building Corporation and Vermette v. Vocisano - [1947] SCR 358 - 1947-03-13
Supreme Court JudgmentsStatutes
Then, in Lloyd v. Williams 11, Blackstone J. is reported to have conceived that interest may as lawfully be received before-hand for forbearing as after the term is expired for having forborne.
-
1,857.
Spun Rock Wools Ltd. v. Fiberglas Canada Ltd. - [1943] SCR 547 - 1943-10-05
Supreme Court JudgmentsIntellectual property
Solicitor for the appellant: William A. MacRae. Solicitors for the (plaintiffs) respondents: Smart & Biggar.
-
1,858.
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
-
1,859.
Clark v. The King - (1921) 61 SCR 608 - 1921-03-11
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
As against these observations may be put the language of Tindal C. J. in addressing the jury in McNaughton's Case[27], where he presided with Williams J. and Coleridge J. The learned Chief Justice used these words:—
-
1,860.
Toronto Suburban Rway. Co. v. Everson - (1917) 54 SCR 395 - 1917-02-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsExpropriation
The appellants’ railway is not to be constructed upon a public highway, as was the case in Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Co. v. Fort William Land Investment Co.[40], referred to by Mr. Henderson.
-
1,861.
Kohler v. Thorold Natural Gas Co. - (1916) 52 SCR 514 - 1916-02-14
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
And whereas by a contract made between William J. Aikens, ‘Frank R. Lalor and S. A. Beck, of the one part, and the company of the other part, bearing date the 28th day of June, 1911, the company agreed to purchase gas from the said Aikens, Lalor and Beck as therein stated;
-
1,862.
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.
-
1,863.
Faulkner v. City of Ottawa - (1909) 41 SCR 190 - 1909-02-12
Supreme Court JudgmentsMunicipal law
Examples of the rigid application of the principle will be found in Williams v. Corporation of Raleigh[3], and in East Freemantle Corporation v. Annois[4].
-
1,864.
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.
-
1,865.
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.
-
1,866.
Manitoba Assurance Co. v. Whitla / Whitla v. Royal Insurance Co. - (1903) 34 SCR 191 - 1903-11-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
And in McCance v. London & North Western Railway Co. ([41]), Williams J. in delivering the judgment of the Exchequer Chamber says:
-
1,867.
Huson v. South Norwich (Township) - (1895) 24 SCR 145 - 1895-01-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Huson (Plaintiff) Appellant; and The Municipal Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Norwich (Defendants) Respondents.
-
1,868.
Lynch v. The Canada North-West. Land Co. / South Dufferin v. Morden / Gibbins v. Barber - (1891) 19 SCR 204 - 1891-06-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Gibbins (Defendant) Appellants And Barbara Barber (Plaintiff)
-
1,869.
Godson v. Toronto (City) - (1890) 18 SCR 36 - 1890-11-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsMunicipal law
The only person named in the resolution, as being subjected as a party to the inquiry required to be instituted by “the judge” is an officer of the corporation, William Lackie, into whose conduct, as inspector in relation to the particular matters specified in the resolution, the inquiry is directed.
-
1,870.
Archibald v. Hubley - (1890) 18 SCR 116 - 1890-11-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsSale
namely; The said Andrew Hubley, $100, Benjamin Hubley $400, Thomas Ritchie (interest $45, city taxes and water rates now $38), Gordon and Keith $12, Doctor Cowie $60, John McLearn $8.35, R. N. McDonald $12.16, Williams and Manual $14.40, Hessian and Devine, $4.10, and the balance, if any, to the said Charles L. Eaton."
-
1,871.
Evans v. Skelton - (1889) 16 SCR 637 - 1889-03-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsLease
WILLIAM S. EVANS (PLAINTIFF) Appellant; And LESLIE J. SKELTON et al (DEFENDANTS)
-
1,872.
Beatty v. Neelon - (1886) 13 SCR 1 - 1886-11-08
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
The service to be rendered under this last contract was that a steamer should leave Sarnia twice a week, namely, on Tuesdays and Fridays, calling at Southampton and Fort William only en route to Duluth.
-
1,873.
Carey v. Toronto (City) - (1886) 14 SCR 172 - 1886-04-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsSale
Alexander MacDonell, The Corporation of the City of Toronto, William Henry Bennett and James Arthur Bennett (Defendants) Respondents.
-
1,874.
Jones v. Kinney - (1885) 11 SCR 708 - 1885-05-12
Supreme Court JudgmentsBankruptcy and insolvency
Campbell v. Barrie[2]; Allan v. Clarkson[3]; Ex parte Winder in re Winstanley[4]; Ex parte Wilkinson in re Berry[5]; Bittlestone v. Cooke[6]; and Bills v. Smith[7]; and Williams on Bankruptcy[8]; and McWhirter v. Thorne[9].
-
1,875.
Shields v. Peak - (1883) 8 SCR 579 - 1883-05-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
The action was commenced by Francis Peak, William Winch, W. Ray, and Herman Seidel, against the said John Shields and James Shields to recover $4,000.