Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
2,369 result(s)
-
201.
Oliver v. Davidson - (1882) 11 SCR 166 - 1882-06-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario[1], affirming the decree of Proudfoot, V.C. The question which arose on this appeal was whether, under the provision of the will of one William Oliver [...] I give and bequeath unto my two sons, Thomas and William Oliver, my farm in the township of Brantford and county of Brant, Ontario, being composed of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, in the Ox Bow Bend [...] In the second clause of his will the testator bequeaths to his two sons, Thomas and William Oliver, a farm in the township of Brantford, but on condition of their
-
202.
Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Brodie - (1879) 5 SCR 1 - 1880-04-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
WILLIAM BRODIE. Respondent. 1879: Nov 5; 1879: Nov 7; 1879: Nov 8; 1880: April 10 [...] Kerr on Fraud and Mistake ([1]) ; Principal of Harris v. Pepperell ([2]); Webster v. Cecil ([3]); Wood v. Searth([4]); Calverley v Williams ([5]); Brown v. Blackwell ([6]). [...] à payer les frais encourus par le procureur de Brodie ; elle est en ces termes " and furthermore the said company are willing to pay and hereby offer to pay the costs incurred " by the said William Brodie to his attorney and which " costs the said company have already heretofore tendered to the said William Brodie."
-
203.
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
-
204.
Steedman v. Sparks & McKay - [1930] SCR 351 - 1930-02-26
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
William Sparks and William A. McKay, Carrying on Business as Building Contractors Under the Name, Style and Firm of “Sparks & McKay (Plaintiffs) Respondents; [...] William J. Lord, and Others (Defendants). James P. Steedman (Defendant) Appellant; [...] William J. Lord, and Others (Defendants). 1929: November 5; 1930: February 26.
-
205.
Quebec West Election Case (Price v. Power) - (1909) 42 SCR 140 - 1909-05-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsElections
William Price (Respondent) Appellant; and Edward Neville, Junior (Petitioner) Respondent. [...] William Power (Respondent) Appellant; and William Price (Cross-Petitioner) Respondent. [...] 11. And your petitioner also says that the said William Power, during the said election, directly and indirectly, by himself and by his agents, with his actual knowledge, consent and privity, has committed acts and the offence of undue influence.
-
206.
Cowen v. Evans / Mitchell v. Trenholme / Mills v. Limoges - (1893) 22 SCR 331 - 1893-06-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsCivil procedure
The statute 54 & 55 Vic. c. 25 sec. 3, did not apply to cases pending en délibéré before the Superior Court, on the 30th September, 1891, and as the amount of the judgment appealed from was under $2,000 the case was not appealable, following on the question of the no retroactivity of the statute, Williams v. Irvine [...] On appeal, the Supreme Court, following the decision of Williams v. Irvine ([4]) quashed the appeal for want of jurisdiction, holding that 54 & 55 Vic. c. 25, did not. apply. [...] Mouette v. Lefebvre ([5]) and Williams v. Irvine followed ([6]). [Page 335]
-
207.
Éditions Écosociété Inc. v. Banro Corp. - 2012 SCC 18 - [2012] 1 SCR 636 - 2012-04-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsInternational law
Les Éditions Écosociété Inc., Alain Deneault, Delphine Abadie and William Sacher [...] and William Sacher Appellants v. Banro Corporation Respondent and [...] William C. McDowell, Yashoda Ranganathan and William Amos, for the appellants.
-
208.
Reference Re Minimum Wage Act of Saskatchewan - [1948] SCR 248 - 1948-04-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Was the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal right in holding in its decision in Williams v. Graham that The Minimum Wage Act, Chapter 310 of the Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1940, was applicable to the employment of Leo Fleming in the Post Office at Maple Creek, Saskatchewan? [...] Was the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal right in holding in its decision in Williams v. Graham that the Minimum Wage Act, Chapter 310 of the Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1940, was applicable to the employment of Leo Fleming in the Post Office at Maple Creek Saskatchewan? [...] The result is that the Minimum Wage Act of the Province of Saskatchewan is not applicable to the employment of Leo Fleming in the post office at Maple Creek, and that the Court of Appeal erred when it held in its decision in Re Williams v. Graham that it did.
-
209.
Grabowski v. The Queen - [1985] 2 SCR 434 - 1985-11-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
31. First, he said that the person named, William Murphy, was a "straw man". [...] [TRANSLATION] WILLIAM MURPHY was arrested at the same time, but at his place of residence, and at the preliminary inquiry the Crown withdrew the charge against him. [...] WILLIAM MURPHY then testified that he was only the caretaker of the building and had no knowledge of the suspicious acts of the accused.
-
210.
Wentworth Election Case (Sealey v. Smith) - (1905) 36 SCR 497 - 1905-10-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsElections
Appeal from the judgment of Chief Justice Sir William R. Meredith and Mr. Justice Teetzel[1], avoiding the election of the respondent Smith for the Electoral District of Wentworth, Ont. [...] "1. The election above referred to was holden on the 27th day of October and the 3rd day of November, A.D., 1904, when the petitioner William Oscar Sealey and Ernest Disraeli Smith were the candidates. [...] "8. Pursuant to the provisions of the Dominion Controverted Elections Act, on the 25th day of November, 1904, the petitioner filed his petition herein, and on the 10th day of December, 1904, the respondent herein filed his cross-petition against the said William Oscar Sealey.
-
211.
Bayshore Shopping Centre v. Nepean (Township) - [1972] SCR 755 - 1972-03-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsMunicipal law
The Corporation of the Township of Nepean and William Bourne and March Ridge Developments Limited (Defendants) Respondents. [...] Walter D. Baker, Q.C., for the respondents, William Bourne and Township of Nepean. [...] Solicitors for the respondents, Township of Nepean and William Bourne: Bell, Baker, Thompson & Oyen, Ottawa.
-
212.
Industrial Acceptance Corp. Ltd. and Canadian Acceptance Corp. Ltd. v. Canada Permanent Trust Co. / In re Smith and Hogan, Ltd. - [1931] SCR 652 - 1931-11-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsBankruptcy and insolvency
We agree with the view expressed by Ritchie, C.J., and Strong, J., in In re Sproule[4], that where “jurisdiction is conferred on a judge in chambers a right to revise his decision is impliedly conferred on the court unless there is something in the subject matter or context leading to a contrary conclusion.” In Williams v. [...] Authorities giving effect to this view are cited in the judgment of Taschereau, C.J., in Williams’ case[6] and need not be reproduced here. [...] But Williams’ case6 should not be regarded as governing cases in which the judge in chambers has granted an application for leave to appeal in disregard of some essential statutory condition of the right of the applicant to have his application for leave heard and passed upon.
-
213.
McDiarmid Lumber Ltd. v. God's Lake First Nation - 2006 SCC 58 - [2006] 2 SCR 846 - 2006-12-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsAboriginal law
14 The band argues that the Williams approach better reflects the broader purpose of this protective provision of the Indian Act . [...] As Gonthier J. stated in Williams, “the purpose of the sections was not to confer a general economic benefit upon the Indians” (p. 885). [...] As Gonthier J. noted in Williams, at p. 887, “under the Indian Act , an Indian has a choice with regard to his personal property. . . .
-
214.
Rooker v. Hoofstetter - (1896) 26 SCR 41 - 1896-02-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
William H.A. Rooker (Defendant) Appellant; and Amelia Hoofstetter (Plaintiff) Respondent. [...] On the 30th day of December, 1886, William H. Christopher conveyed by way of mortgage the northwest ¼ of lot 16, in the 9th concession of the township of Storrington, to the respondent to secure the sum of $350 and interest. [...] This writing does not constitute an agreement to charge lot 19 within the statute of frauds, the party with whom it was made not being disclosed; William v. Jordan[2]; Williams v. Lake[3]; and there being no consideration; Agnew on the Statute of Frauds[4].
-
215.
Rothfield v. Manolakos - [1989] 2 SCR 1259 - 1989-12-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
of Vernon and William Phillips Appellants v. Peter Manolakos and Voula Manolakos Respondents [...] and Morris Reade, a.k.a. William Morris Defendants and Woodcraft Ventures Ltd. Third Party [...] and Morris Reade, a.k.a. William Morris Third Parties indexed as: rothfield v. manolakos
-
216.
Arnott v. College of Physicians - [1954] SCR 538 - 1954-10-05
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
He described glyoxylide as "an aqueous solution of a chemical compound discovered by Dr. William F. Koch, in a highly diluted state. [...] On April 28, 1944, appellant entered into an agreement with William F. Koch Laboratories of Canada Limited which provided in part: [...] The Plaintiff is the Canadian owner of a license for the manufacture of a substance called Glyoxilide, which license is dated April 28th, 1944, issued by William F. Koch, the patentee under Canadian Patents Nos. 381496 and 430881.
-
217.
Glatt v. Glatt - [1937] SCR 347 - 1937-02-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
G.F. Glatt, The Trustee of the Property of William D. Trenwith, a Bankrupt (Plaintiff) Appellant; [...] By an order of McEvoy J. dated November 9, 1934, “in the matter of the bankruptcy of William D. Trenwith,” leave was given (upon terms) to Margaret Trenwith, the wife, and a creditor, of said William D. Trenwith, to commence proceedings in the name of the Trustee (G.F. Glatt) at her own expense for the purpose of setting
-
218.
Capital Trust Corpn. Ltd. v. The Minister of National Revenue - [1937] SCR 192 - 1937-02-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsTaxation
This will remained unchanged from 1909 until November 14th, 1923, at which time, one of his sons named as an executor and trustee having died, Sir William appointed by codicil two additional executors and trustees, thereby increasing the number from two to four. [...] This is a codicil to the last will and testament of me, William Mackenzie, of Benvenuto, Toronto. [...] The following day Sir William died. Joseph M. Mackenzie, a son of the testator and one of the executors named in the will, survived his father and died some time in 1932.
-
219.
Irving Oil Co. Ltd. v. The King - [1946] SCR 551 - 1946-10-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsExpropriation
This ship made two trips each week during the summer, docking at Reed's Point, just across Prince William street from the land here in question. [...] The land lay at the corner of Britain and Prince William streets in the city of Saint John, almost immediately opposite the wharf at which the steamships of the Eastern Steamship Company tied up. [...] The only part of that land we are here concerned with was owned by the appellant and situated at the corner of Britain and Prince William streets.
-
220.
R. v. Kapp - 2008 SCC 41 - [2008] 2 SCR 483 - 2008-06-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Fishery
Bruce Crosby, Barry Dolby, Wayne Ellis, William Gaunt, George Horne, [...] Hon van Lam, William Leslie Sr., Bob M. McDonald, Leona McDonald, Stuart McDonald, Ryan McEachern, William McIsaac, Melvin (Butch) Mitchell, [...] Crosby, Barry Dolby, Wayne Ellis, William Gaunt, George Horne, Hon van Lam, William Leslie Sr., Bob M. McDonald,
-
221.
The Queen v. Doig - [1963] SCR 3 - 1962-10-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
William Thomas Alexander Doig Respondent. 1962: May 25; 1962: October 02. [...] William Thomas Alexander Doig" and which stated that an application would be made before the judge in chambers on September 19, 1960, for an order [...] The style of cause in the formal judgment entered in the Court of Appeal was "Regina, Respondent, William Thomas Alexander Doig, Appellant."
-
222.
Parna v. G. & S. Properties Ltd. - [1971] SCR 306 - 1970-10-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
G. & S. Properties Limited, and Frank Albert and William Harvie (Defendants) Respondents. [...] G. & S. Properties Limited, a respondent, is a company owned and controlled by the other respondents, Frank Albert and William Harvie, who were, respectively, its president and secretary. [...] William Harvie [Page 314] Within an hour after receipt of that document, Mr. Miller testified, the appellants August and Reta Parna attended him.
-
223.
McPhee v. Esquimalt and Nanaimo Ry. Co. - (1913) 49 SCR 43 - 1913-11-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
In Williams v. Birmingham Battery and Metal Co.[12], Lord Justice A. L. Smith says, at page 344, that the defence summarized by the maxim volenti non fit injuria is that the employee has [...] In Williams' Case[21], it is expressly stated by Romer L.J., at page 345, that the circumstance that the servant has entered: [...] The same view is expressed by Romer L.J. in Williams v. The Birmingham Battery and Metal Co.[24]:
-
224.
Fraser v. Pouliot - (1879) 4 SCR 515 - 1879-12-12
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
WILLIAM FRASER Appellant; And J. B. POULIOT, es-qualité Respondent. [...] La 2e sec. autorise les Appelants William et Edouard Fraser à vendre et aliéner conjointement par lots et portions le domaine de la dite seigneurie,—pourvu toujours que cette vente soit faite pour une rente foncière non. rachetable, on pour une rente constituée. [...] La 3e sec. declare que les dits William et Edouard Fraser ne pourront recevoir et placer le capital des rentes constituées sans le consentement du tuteur à la substitution.
-
225.
St-George's v. King - (1878) 2 SCR 143 - 1878-01-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsArbitration
Present:—Sir William Buell Richards, C. J., and Ritchie, Strong, Taschereau, and Fournier, J.J. [...] [8] Williams' notes to Saunder's Rep., vol. 1, p. 37, and eases there collected. [...] [34] 1 Williams' Saunders, 33 a. [35] 8 C. B. N. S. 146. [36] 9 Ad. & E. 522.