Advanced Search
- All Databases (2,511)
- Decisions (1,094)
- Resources (1,417)
1,094 result(s)
-
1,026.
Couture v. Bouchard - (1892) 21 SCR 281 - 1892-11-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
[9] 4.Scott 486. [10] 9 Q. B. 47. [11] 54 & 55 Vic. ch. 25 sec. 3.
-
1,027.
Harris v. Robinson - (1892) 21 SCR 390 - 1892-10-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
As to waiver see Salisbury v. Hatcher[5] and Hoggart v. Scott[6]. Plaintiff was entitled to reasonable notice of rescission.
-
1,028.
Williams v. Raleigh (Township) - (1892) 21 SCR 103 - 1892-06-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsMunicipal law
Scott v. Corporation of Peterboro’[12]. As to necessity of notice see Chrysler v. Township of Sarnia[13]; Luney v. Essery[14].
-
1,029.
Scott v. The Bank of New Brunswick - (1892) 21 SCR 30 - 1892-05-16
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
Scott v. The Bank of New Brunswick, (1892) 21 SCR 30 Supreme Court of Canada [...] Scott v. The Bank of New Brunswick (1892) 21 SCR 30 Date: 1892-05-16 [...] Scott v. The Bank of New Brunswick 1892: May 16. Present:—Sir W. J. Ritchie C.J., and Strong, Taschereau, Gwynne and Patterson JJ.
-
1,030.
Peers v. Elliott - (1892) 21 SCR 19 - 1892-05-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsCivil procedure
As to what will constitute negligence see Pickard v. Smith[2]; Scott v. London Dock Co.[3]
-
1,031.
Barton v. McMillan - (1892) 20 SCR 404 - 1892-04-04
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
Moss Q.C. for the appellants cited James v. Smith[1]; Nobel’s Explosives Co. v. Jones, Scott & Co.[2]
-
1,032.
Bernardin v. The Municipality of North Dufferin - (1891) 19 SCR 581 - 1891-11-16
Supreme Court JudgmentsMunicipal law
The latest case is Scott v. Clifton School Board ([3]) ; and see Clarke v. Cuckfield Union ([4]); followed in Nicholson v. Bradfield Union ([5]); Sanders v. St. Neat’s Union ([6]), approved in Smart v. Guardians of West Ham Union ([7]). [...] In December, 1884, the case of Scott v. Clifton, School Board (3) was decided by Mathew J. The action was by an architect to recover payment for plans prepared for the school board which is a corporate body.
-
1,033.
McKean v. Jones - (1891) 19 SCR 489 - 1891-11-16
Supreme Court JudgmentsCivil procedure
Malcolm v. Scott[1]; Liversidge v. Broadbent[2]; Burn v. Carvalho[3].
-
1,034.
Barrett v. The City of Winnipeg - (1891) 19 SCR 374 - 1891-10-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
seems to do any violence to the language of the clause it is only by treating the word “by ” where it is understood before the word “ practice,” as not having precisely the same force as when expressed before the word “law.” But, as once remarked by one of the most eminent English judges, Lord Stowell, when Sir W. Scott— [...] [13] 2 Scott (N.B.) 531. 1 1 A. & E. 142. [14] 4 Q. B. D. 261. [15] 1 Pugs.
-
1,035.
McRae v. Marshall - (1891) 19 SCR 10 - 1891-06-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsLabour law
Solicitors for appellant: Walker, Scott & Lees. Solicitors for respondent: Carscallen & Cahill.
-
1,036.
Gray v. Coughlin - (1891) 18 SCR 553 - 1891-01-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
Scott Q.C. for the respondent cited DeColyar on Guarantees[11]; Brand on Suretyship and Guarantee[12]; Patterson v. Hope[13]; Newton v. Charlton[14]; Farebrother v. Wodehouse[15] Duncan & Co. v. North and South Wales Bank[16]; Forbes v. Jackson[17]. [...] Solicitor for respondent: Henry J. Scott. [1] 16 Ont. App. R. 224; sub-nomine McLellan v. Gray.
-
1,037.
Green v. Citizens Insurance Co. - (1890) 18 SCR 338 - 1890-12-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsArbitration
[14] 8 Scott 180. [15] 3 K. & J. 66. [16] P. 261. [17] 10 Q.B.D. 295.
-
1,038.
Williams v. Balfour - (1890) 18 SCR 472 - 1890-12-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
S. H. Blake Q. C. and Wilson for the appellants referred to Nichols v. Watson ([1]); Clarkson v. Scott ([2]); Real Estate Loan Company v. Molesworth ([3]); Gandy v. Gandy ([4]).
-
1,039.
Archibald v. Hubley - (1890) 18 SCR 116 - 1890-11-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsSale
[32] 3 M. & Scott 552. [33] 2 Chitty 239. [34] Jud. Act sec. 45.
-
1,040.
MacDougall v. The Law Society of Upper Canada - (1890) 18 SCR 203 - 1890-11-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsProfessional law
Scott v. Miller[14]; Candler v. Candler[15]; Sterry v. Clifton[16]; Lindley on Partnership.
-
1,041.
Clarkson v. Ryan - (1890) 17 SCR 251 - 1890-06-12
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
Aylesworth for the respondent cited Allan v. The Great Western Railway Co.[6]; Scott v. The Great Western Railway Co.[7]
-
1,042.
Davis v. Kerr - (1890) 17 SCR 235 - 1890-03-10
Supreme Court JudgmentsAgency
I need only refer on this and other points arising on the case, to the authorities cited in Miller v. Demeule ([25]) * and to Gagnon v Sylva ([26]); Venner v. Lortie ([27]) : Demolombe ([28]); Laurent ([29]); Sirey ([30]); Sirey ([31]); Urquhart v. Scott ([32]); Payne v. Scott ([33]).
-
1,043.
Shaw v. Caldwell - (1889) 17 SCR 357 - 1889-04-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
note for the sum so borrowed, and he afterwards uses the proceeds of the note in the partnership business of his own free will without being under any obligation to, or contract with, the lender so to do, the partnership is not liable for said loan, under Art. 1867 C.C. Maguire v. Scott, 7 L. C. R. 451, distinguished. [...] Maguire v. Scott, ([3]) and Codifiers' Report on Partnership ([4]). The authorities relied on by respondents in the court below are not applicable as art. 1867 is not to be found in the French Code. [...] The case of Maguire v. Scott (2) referred to in the authorities under article 1867 is entirely different from the present one; in that case it was a purchase of goods by one partner in his own name, the seller being
-
1,044.
In re Smart - (1889) 16 SCR 396 - 1889-04-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
W.H. Kerr Q.C. and Scott Q.C. for the respondent. The judgment of the court was delivered by [...] Solicitor for respondent: H.J. Scott. [1] 12 Ont. P.R. 635. [2] 12 Ont. P.R. 312.
-
1,045.
The Manitoba Mortgage Company v. The Bank of Montreal - (1889) 17 SCR 692 - 1889-02-08
Supreme Court JudgmentsFinancial institutions
Christopher Robinson Q.C. for the respondents referred to Brandon v. Scott ([10]); Charles v. Blackwell ([11]); Smith v. Johnson ([12]).
-
1,046.
Foot v. Foot - (1888) 15 SCR 699 - 1888-12-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
Graham Q.C. for respondents referred to Re Grey's Settlements, Acason v. Greenwood[8]; D'Oechsner v. Scott[9]; Doolan v. Blake[10]; Freeman v. Flood[11].
-
1,047.
Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Chalifoux - (1888) 22 SCR 721 - 1888-06-14
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Mr. Justice Scott, delivering the opinion of the court, said: On the night of the 20th February, 1872, the passengers cars on defendant's road were thrown from the track at a point a short distance from east of Mahomet station, by which plaintiff was severely injured.
-
1,048.
Byers v. McMillan - (1887) 15 SCR 194 - 1887-12-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
Re Mason and Scott ([13]). McNeely v. McWilliams ([14]). STRONG J.—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba, reversing the decision of Mr. Justice Dubuc, before whom the action was tried without a jury, and directing judgment to be entered for the plaintiffs in the action. [...] See also Evans v. Roe ([21]); Abrey v. Crux ([22]); Mason v. Scott ([23]); In this latter case it was held:—
-
1,049.
Confederation Life Association v. Miller - (1887) 14 SCR 330 - 1887-12-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
That a new trial will not be granted in such a case, see McDermott v. Ireson[13], following Scott v. Scott[14]; Fawcett v. Mothersell[15]; The Queen v. McIlroy[16]; Murray v. Canada Central[17].
-
1,050.
Canadian Pacific Ry. Co. v. Robinson - (1887) 14 SCR 105 - 1887-06-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
"The Court allows ten minutes in order to give time" to said Charles Scott to appear before this Court and " give his evidence. [...] "The time allowed by the Court to permit witness " Scott to appear having expired, the enquête of defendants is declared closed. [...] C. Scott's affidavit is as follows : Charles Scott, of Philadilphia, in the state of Pennsylvania, one of the United States of America, manufacturer. being duly sworn, doth depose and say:—