Advanced Search
- All Databases (2,511)
- Decisions (1,094)
- Resources (1,417)
1,094 result(s)
-
126.
O'Connor v. Waldron - [1932] SCR 183 - 1931-12-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
on the principle laid down in Scott v. Scott[6]. Luxmoore J. and the majority of the judges in the Court of Appeal (Lawrence and Romer, LJJ.) held that it was unnecessary to determine this question, but Lawrence, L.J., states that, in his opinion, there is a good deal to be said for the contention of the Attorney General [...] Lord Hanworth in his dissenting judgment says that if the hearing was a judicial proceeding he would follow the principle laid down in Scott v. Scott6.
-
127.
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
-
128.
Ontario (Attorney General) v. Pembina Exploration Canada Ltd. - [1989] 1 SCR 206 - 1989-02-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
2 D.L.R. 925; Horne v. Krezan, Shamlock and Young (1955), 14 W.W.R. 625; Pile Foundations Ltd. v. Selkirk Silica Co. and Perry (1967), 59 W.W.R. 622; Scott v. Scott (1891), 4 B.C.R. 316; Tytler v. Jamieson, [1935] 3 W.W.R. 510; Bilsland v. Bilsland, [1922] 1 W.W.R. 718; Mitchell v. Mitchell and Croome, [1936] 1 W.W.R. [...] For a time, it is true, the British Columbia courts took the view that a province is without authority to confer jurisdiction on its courts in respect of federal matters; see Scott v. Scott (1891), 4 B.C.R. 316; Tytler v. Jamieson, [1935] 3 W.W.R. 510 (B.C.C.A.); but see now Balfour Guthrie (Canada) Ltd. v. Far Eastern [...] It appears to me that the learned Judges who decided Scott v. Scott and Brown v. Brown did not pay sufficient regard to sub‑head No. 14 of sec. 92 of The B.N.A. Act, which confers upon the Legislature in each province jurisdiction to make laws in relation to
-
129.
Johnson v. R. - [1975] 2 SCR 160 - 1973-10-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Detective Scott was the only witness called for the prosecution and his evidence was so brief that I quote in full the relevant parts thereof; [...] Q. And I suggest to you, Detective Scott, that it was rather a beautiful performance? [...] Q. I suggest to you, Detective Scott, that it was rather a beautiful performance.
-
130.
Boulet v. The Queen - [1978] 1 SCR 332 - 1976-11-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
They crossed the Quebec City bridge and went toward the Hotel St-Henri in Scott together, in Lamothe’s and Quirion’s cars; they stopped a couple of miles from the hotel. [...] He followed them, for no particular reason, on September 18, and with them he met Bilodeau, whom he did not know, near the Hotel St-Henri in Scott. [...] Lord Russell C.J., referring to, and adopting the Scott case, supra, said (Regina v. Erdheim, (1896) 2 Q.B., 260 at 267, 18 Cox C.C. 355):
-
131.
Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration - [1985] 1 SCR 177 - 1985-04-04
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
39. Mr. Scott, for the other six appellants, took a different approach. [...] 92. Mr. Scott then concludes on this first branch of his submission: [...] 98. I therefore agree with the first branch of Mr. Scott's submission.
-
132.
Finlay et al. v. Auld - [1975] 1 SCR 338 - 1973-10-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsProfessional law
At trial Gillis J. found that the plaintiffs had not established sufficiently that the disability was of sudden onset however the Appeal Division felt that the plaintiffs appellants had made out a prima facie case to apply the rule in Scott v. London and St. Katherine Docks Company (1865), 3 H & C. 596 and require the [...] As the appellants have made out a prima facie case of sudden and serious voice impairment manifested directly after the operation this is a case in which the rule in Scott v. London and St. Katherine Docks Company comes into play, whether or not the respondent has rebutted any inference of negligence is the whole case. [...] Scott v. London and St. Katherine Docks Company (1865), 3 H & C. 596; United Motors Services Inc. v. Hatson et al., [1937] S.C.R. 294; Woods v. Duncan, [1946] A.C. 401 referred to.
-
133.
0802913 BC Ltd., et al. v. John Roberts - 2014-10-30
Applications for LeaveSayde, Andrea Scaffo, Marcus Antonio Scelsa, Evelyn Scherr, Tyson Schiesser, Peter H. Scholl, Nelda Schulte, Margaret Schuurman, Jane Schwartz, Jon Scott, Lesley Scott, Pam Seelle, Deren Sentesy, Dragos Serban, Diana M. Serpes, Felix Seta, Mark Seymour, Raman Sharma, Laura M. Sheahan, Bill Sheets, Jeff Sheppard, Larisa [...] Sayde, Andrea Scaffo, Marcus Antonio Scelsa, Evelyn Scherr, Tyson Schiesser, Peter H. Scholl, Nelda Schulte, Margaret Schuurman, Jane Schwartz, Jon Scott, Lesley Scott, Pam Seelle, Deren Sentesy, Dragos Serban, Diana M. Serpes, Felix Seta, Mark Seymour, Raman Sharma, Laura M. Sheahan, Bill Sheets, Jeff Sheppard, Larisa
-
134.
R. v. Showman - [1988] 2 SCR 893 - 1988-12-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Constable Adam gave evidence that a further drug transaction was set up and the appellant took him to the residence of a Scott Muirhead. [...] 13. Then the appellant contacted Scott Muirhead who supplied him with three separately wrapped half‑pounds of marijuana. [...] The accused says he was only boasting, and had been told by his friend, Scott, to act as though he were a drug dealer.
-
135.
Maddison v. Emmerson - (1904) 34 SCR 533 - 1904-04-27
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
Doe d Ponsford v Vernon[29]; Smith v. Morrow[30]; Murray v. Duff[31]; Scott v. Henderson[32]; Smyth v. McDonald[33]. [...] It first arose incidentally in Nova Scotia in 1843, in the case of Scott v. Henderson[42]. [...] And in Scott v. Nixon[59], Sugden, L.C. compelled an unwilling purchaser to take a title depending upon parol evidence of possession under the statute.
-
136.
McMillan v. Brownlee - [1937] SCR 318 - 1937-03-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Two judgments were delivered, one by Scott J., another by Beck J., in which Stuart J. concurred. [...] In this way, I come in effect to the same conclusion as my brother Scott. [...] Stuart J. concurred with me and Scott C.J. (the Court being composed of three members) was evidently of the same opinion.
-
137.
R. v. Riesberry - 2015 SCC 65 - [2015] 3 SCR 1167 - 2015-12-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
The House of Lords made the same point in Scott v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner, [1975] A.C. 819, a case approved by the Court in Olan (p. 1181). [...] Fraud, according to Viscount Dilhorne in Scott, may consist of depriving “a person dishonestly of something which is his or of something to which he is or would or might but for the perpetration of the fraud be entitled”: p. 839. [...] To return to Viscount Dilhorne’s words in Scott, Mr. Riesberry’s dishonest conduct created a risk that bettors would be deprived dishonestly of something which, but for the dishonest act, they might have obtained.
-
138.
Canadian National Steamships Co. Ltd. v. Watson - [1939] SCR 11 - 1938-12-12
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
If the Chief Officer, Lieutenant Scott, had ordered life lines erected earlier the accident might have been avoided.” The trial judge, on the finding of the jury, ordered judgment to be entered for the respondent, and this judgment was affirmed on appeal. [...] If the Chief Officer, Lieutenant Scott, had ordered life lines erected earlier the accident might have been avoided. [...] If the Chief Officer, Lieutenant Scott, had ordered life lines erected earlier the accident might have been avoided.
-
139.
Cowper‑Smith v. Morgan - 2017 SCC 61 - [2017] 2 SCR 754 - 2017-12-14
Supreme Court JudgmentsCourts in the United Kingdom, for example, have recognized that in such circumstances an equity may arise in favour of the claimant before the promisor holds the promised right or benefit (Abbey National Building Society v. Cann, [1991] 1 A.C. 56 (H.L.), at pp. 95 and 102; Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd. v. Scott, [2014] [...] But such an equity cannot confer a proprietary right in the promised property, but rather a mere personal right against the promisor (Abbey, at pp. 89 and 95; Scott, at paras. 104 and 111; S. Wilken and K. Ghaly, The Law of Waiver, Variation, and Estoppel (3rd ed. 2012), at §11.130). [...] As Lord Collins explained for (on this point) a unanimous Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in Scott, at para. 79, “the [claimants] acquired no more than personal rights against the [promisors] when they agreed to sell their properties on the basis of the [promisors’] promises that they would be entitled to remain in
-
140.
Dubois v. The Queen - [1985] 2 SCR 350 - 1985-11-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Criminal law
R. v. Brown (No. 2) (1963), 40 C.R. 105 (S.C.C.), rev'g (1963), 40 C.R. 90 (N.W.T.C.A.), distinguished; Piché v. The Queen, [1971] S.C.R. 23; R. v. Scott (1856), Dears. [...] This argument is best answered in the words of Lord Campbell C.J. in the Regina v. Scott case, supra, p. 59. [...] 47. The Scott case (R. v. Scott (1856), Dears. & B. 47, 169 E.R. 909) concerns a bankrupt who was, under the laws of England, bound by statute to answer all questions touching matters relating to his trade dealings.
-
141.
R. v. Durette - [1994] 1 SCR 469 - 1994-03-17
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Criminal law
The impugned authorizations were granted by Judge Scott of the District Court of Ontario. [...] The trial judge noted that he had edited the affidavits filed in support of the wiretap authorizations granted by Scott Dist. [...] Ct. J.] could have been satisfied that there was some evidence before the learned authorizing judge [Scott Dist.
-
142.
MacLean v. Henning - (1903) 33 SCR 305 - 1903-04-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
H.J. Scott K.C. and O’Brien K.C. for the respondents (plaintiffs) cited Wing v. Angrave[5]; Van Grutten v. Foxwell[6]. [...] A counter suggestion made by Mr. Scott, as to testator’s failure expressly to provide for the contingency of his survivorship, suggests itself as most reasonable. [...] The will carried out their mutual intention, and the omission on Mr. Henning’s part during the fortnight intervening between his wife’s death and his own to make another will or other disposition of the property than the law, unaided, did, does not to my mind weaken the force of Mr. Scott’s contention that the language of
-
143.
Named Person v. Vancouver Sun - 2007 SCC 43 - [2007] 3 SCR 253 - 2007-10-11
Supreme Court JudgmentsCourts
For example, situations in which the informer is a material witness to a crime fall within the innocence at stake exception: R. v. Scott, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 979, at p. 996. [...] All other so-called exceptions are simply applications of this one true exception: Scott, at p. 996; D. M. Paciocco and L. Stuesser, The Law of Evidence (4th ed. 2005), at p. 254. [...] This principle, as the Court noted in that case, “has long been recognized as a cornerstone of the common law” (para. 24), and has been recognized as part of the law since as far back as Scott v. Scott, [1913] A.C. 417 (H.L.), and Ambard v. Attorney-General for Trinidad and Tobago, [1936] A.C. 322 (P.C.), where Lord Atkin
-
144.
R. v. Crosby - [1995] 2 SCR 912 - 1995-06-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Wayne Scott Crosby Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent [...] Q:Had you had sex with Scott before? A:The Friday night before I did. [...] Q:O.K. were you hoping to have sex with Scott again that night? A:No.
-
145.
Wilcox v. Cavan - [1975] 2 SCR 663 - 1974-10-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Considerable importance attaches to the fact that the proper practice in giving such an injection, and the one which Mrs. Wilcox said she followed, is that described by Dr. Scott where he said: [...] It will be asked why, then, did Mrs. Wilcox not get blood on aspiration of the syringe if the needle was in it, to which the answer is given by Doctors MacLean and Scott, that it is possible for the point of the needle to be so positioned that it would not get blood on aspiration but could inject the medication [...] One of the doctors described the event as a misadventure and Dr. Scott stated that if Mrs. Wilcox had given the injection as she stated she did and in the place where Dr. Miller found the mark, “what happened after that was tragic as it was
-
146.
Poje v. Attorney General for British Columbia - [1953] 1 SCR 516 - 1953-04-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsCourts
In his judgment in Scott v. Scott[8] , the question in that case being whether the conduct there in question amounted to criminal contempt, if so, there being no right of appeal, Lord Atkinson reiterates that mere disobedience to an order of the court, even though wilful, does not amount to criminal contempt. [...] It should be said that the conduct in question in Scott v. Scott involved nothing in the nature of a "public" injury if it could be considered to be contempt at all.
-
147.
Coughlin v. The Ontario Highway Transport Board - [1968] SCR 569 - 1968-04-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
There is here no delegation of law‑making power, but rather the adoption by Parliament, in the exercise of its exclusive power, of the legislation of another body as it may from time to time exist, a course which has been held constitutionally valid by this Court in A.G. for Ontario v. Scott, [1956] S.C.R. 137, and by the [...] Il s’agit plutôt de l’adoption par le Parlement, dans l’exercice de son pouvoir exclusif, de la législation d’un autre corps telle qu’elle peut exister de temps à autre, ce qui a été jugé constitutionnellement valide par cette Cour dans A.G. for Ontario v. Scott, [1956] R.C.S. 137, et par la Cour d’appel de l’Ontario dans [...] The case of A.G. for Ontario v. Scott[14], has been cited in support of the validity of the legislation which is here in question, but in my view the question decided in that case was an entirely different one.
-
148.
B.M.P. Global Distribution Inc. v. Bank of Nova Scotia - 2009 SCC 15 - [2009] 1 SCR 504 - 2009-04-02
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
Commercial law
Financial institutions
Scott, Stephen A. “Comment on Benjamin Geva’s Paper: ‘Reflections on the Need to Revise the Bills of Exchange Act — Some Doctrinal Aspects’” (1981‑82), 6 Can. Bus. L.J. 331. [...] Scott, Stephen A. “The Bank is Always Right: Section 165(3) of the Bills of Exchange Act and its Curious Parliamentary History” (1973), 19 McGill L.J. 78. [...] Parliament was initially criticized for acting at the request of the banking industry without understanding the potentially wide scope of the amendment (see S. A. Scott, “The Bank is Always Right: Section 165(3) of the Bills of Exchange Act and its Curious Parliamentary History” (1973), 19 McGill L.J. 78).
-
149.
Doyle v. R. - [1977] 1 SCR 597 - 1976-06-29
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
(5) On April 1, 1974, the appellant appeared before another magistrate named Clement Scott, and on this occasion for the first time the charges were read to him in open court whereafter the Crown at once applied for a further adjournment until August 1st. [...] It is to be noted that between December 8, 1973 when the appellant was arrested, and April 1, 1974, when he appeared before Magistrate Clement Scott, no steps whatever appear to have been taken by the Crown to comply with the requirements of Part XV or XVI of the Criminal Code. [...] I am accordingly of the opinion that Magistrate Scott exceeded his power when he adjourned the case on April 1st and that jurisdiction over the person of the accused was accordingly lost and that the recognizance entered into by the appellant before Magistrate O’Neill on December 11, 1973, is thereby voided.
-
150.
Cullen v. The King - [1949] SCR 658 - 1949-05-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
The rule in civil matters was stated by Duff J. as he then was, in delivering the judgment of the full Court of British Columbia in Scott v. Fernie[3]. [...] In Spencer v. Field[4], the judgment of Davis J. with which Duff C.J.C. and Hudson J. concurred, expressly approved what had been said in Scott v. Fernie and referred to “the long established rule which holds a litigant to a position deliberately assumed by his counsel at the trial.” In Wexler v. The King[5], the [...] In civil matters the true principle has been stated in Scott v. Fernie and Spencer v. Field.