Advanced Search
- All Databases (1,254)
- Decisions (530)
- Resources (724)
530 result(s)
-
126.
McKee v. McKee - [1950] SCR 700 - 1950-06-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsFamily law
Allen v. Allen[10], the wife commenced an action for divorce in the Supreme Court of Illinois in which the husband appeared. [...] In any event, it was pointed out by Rose J., as he then was, in Re Allen[32], after the statute had taken its present form, that the amendments of 1923 left untouched the provisions of section 3, namely, [...] [30] (1862) 4 Allen (Mass.) 321. [31] (1915) 8 O.W.N. 567. [32] (1928) 35 O.W.N. 101
-
127.
Markadonis v. The King - [1935] SCR 657 - 1935-03-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
I shall refer to three precedents: Allen v. The King[6]; Makin v. The Attorney-General of New South Wales[7]; and Maxwell v. The Director of Public Prosecutions[8]. [...] jury “as for example where some merely formal matter not bearing direct on the guilt or innocence of the accused has been proved by other than legal evidence.” In the Allen case[9] the Supreme Court of Canada followed the Makin case (2) and held that the inadmissible evidence may have influenced the verdict of the jury.
-
128.
Manitoba Free Press Co. v. Nagy - (1907) 39 SCR 340 - 1907-11-05
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
See also Chapman v. Pickersgill[22], per Pratt C.J. in answer to the same objection; Langridge v. Levy[23], at page 522, and on appeal[24]; Pasley v. Freeman[25], at page 63, also in 2 Smith's Leading Cases[26], at page 79, per Ashurst J.; Allen v. Flood[27], at page 73; Winsmore v. Greenbank[28], per Willes C.J. at page [...] Case[37] quoted by Cave J. in Allen v. Flood[38], at page 30; Paull v. Halferty[39]; Bruce v. J. M. Smith, Limited[40] Barrett v. Associated Newspapers[41]; Bowen v. Hall[42], per Brett L.J. at pages 337 and 338.
-
129.
R. v. MacDougall - [1998] 3 SCR 45 - 1998-10-29
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
[1984] 2 S.C.R. 145; R. v. Askov, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199; R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771; Gonzales v. State, 582 P.2d 630 (1978); Dickey v. Florida, 398 U.S. 30 (1970); Mills v. The Queen, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863; R. v. Allen (1996), 1 C.R. (5th) 347; R. v. Stensrud, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1115; R. v. Trudel, [1992] R.J.Q. 2647. [...] All cases have “inherent time requirements needed to get a case into the system and to complete that case”: R. v. Allen (1996), 1 C.R. (5th) 347 (Ont. C.A.), at pp. 363-64, per Doherty J.A., aff’d [1997] 3 S.C.R. 700; Morin, at p. 792, per Sopinka J. While the complexity of a case is often cited as a factor contributing to [...] In other words, the inherent time requirements of a case are not limited to commonplace delays which occur in every situation, but may include delay due to extraordinary and unforeseeable events: Allen, supra.
-
130.
Cunningham v. Canada - [1993] 2 SCR 143 - 1993-04-22
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Criminal law
Referred to: Dumas v. Leclerc Institute, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 459; R. v. Gamble, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 595; Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, 442 U.S. 1 (1979); Board of Pardons v. Allen, 482 U.S. 369 (1987); Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972); Re Ross and Warden of Kent [...] This finding was affirmed in Board of Pardons v. Allen, 482 U.S. 369 (1987).
-
131.
Semanczuk v. Semanczyk - [1955] SCR 658 - 1955-06-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
Had she admitted that she had committed adultery, the effect of the section would not have been to render the evidence inadmissible (Allen v. Allen 5 : Welstead v. Brown 6).
-
132.
Cowans v. Marshall - (1897) 28 SCR 161 - 1897-12-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Two courts and a jury have found the prime fact of this case in the same sense, and this court should decline to re-open questions of fact so settled by both courts below: Bellechasse Election Case ([5]); Warner v. Murray ([6]); Black v. Walker ([7]); Allen v. Quebec Warehouse Co ([8]). [...] [27] 1 Allen (Mass.) 436. [28] 62 Vt. 160. [29] 5 M. & W. 175. [30] 1 Man. & G. 731.
-
133.
Millville Mutual Mar. & Fire Ins. Co. v. Driscoll - (1884) 11 SCR 183 - 1884-06-23
Supreme Court JudgmentsEvidence
In the Boston Belting Co. v. Gabel[5], Chief Justice Allen says: The commissioners are officers of the court, though nominated by the parties. [...] [1] 5 Allen (N. B.) 309. [2] L. R. 1 C. P. 600. [3] 5 Q. B. Div. 26.
-
134.
Bell v. Macklin - (1887) 15 SCR 576 - 1887-12-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
Yetts[8]; Newbigging v. Adam[9]; Hart v. Swaine[10]; Arkwright v. Newbold[11]; Allen v. Quebec Warehouse Co.[12] [...] Another rule which I consider altogether distinct from that just adverted to is propounded by the Privy Council in Allen v. Quebec Warehouse Co.[29], according to which a second court of appeal ought not to reverse the concurrent decision of two preceding courts on a question of fact. [...] Allen v. The Quebee Warehouse Co.29 does not therefore apply. I should have pointed out that the conduct of the parties immediately after the sale and up to the month of July, 1883, when the plaintiff for the first time advanced the claim which he afterwards made the subject of this litigation, was entirely consistent with
-
135.
Church v. Abell - (1877) 1 SCR 442 - 1877-01-15
Supreme Court JudgmentsSale
Basten v. Butter[2]; King v. Boston[3]; Allen v. Cameron[4]; Thornton v. Place[5]; Poulton v. Lattimore[6]; Lucy v. Moufet[7]; Grimoldby v. Wells[8]; Benjamin on Sales[9]. [...] [28] 2 Allen, 331. [29] 1 Allen, 47. [30] 15 Johns., 431. [31] 7 Term R., 455.
-
136.
Goudie v. Ottawa (City) - 2003 SCC 14 - [2003] 1 SCR 141 - 2003-03-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsCivil procedure
Labour law
609; Jadwani v. Canada (Attorney General) (2001), 52 O.R. (3d) 660; Giorno v. Pappas (1999), 170 D.L.R. (4th) 160; Bhaduria v. Toronto Board of Education (1999), 173 D.L.R. (4th) 382; Bhairo v. Westfair Foods Ltd., [1997] M.J. No. 219 (QL); Allen v. Alberta (2001), 286 A.R. 132; Young Estate v. TransAlta Utilities Corp. [...] Although Alberta and Newfoundland lack a special rule on jurisdictional challenges, the courts in those provinces achieve the same result on a motion to strike: Allen v. Alberta (2001), 286 A.R. 132 (C.A.); Young Estate v. TransAlta Utilities Corp.
-
137.
Fontaine v. British Columbia (Official Administrator) - [1998] 1 SCR 424 - 1998-03-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Linden, Allen M. Canadian Tort Law, 5th ed. Toronto: Butterworths, 1993. [...] As described in Canadian Tort Law (5th ed. 1993), by Allen M. Linden, at p. 233, “[t]here are situations where the facts merely whisper negligence, but there are other circumstances where they shout it aloud.”
-
138.
R. v. K. (B.) - [1995] 4 SCR 186 - 1995-11-16
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Crown Court at St. Albans, [1974] 3 All E.R. 283; Dagenais v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 835; Reference re Milgaard, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 875; R. v. Martin (1985), 19 C.C.C. (3d) 248; R. v. Jolly (1990), 57 C.C.C. (3d) 389; Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337 (1970); United States v. Wilson, 421 U.S. 309 (1975). [...] This is also consistent with the American approach (Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337 (1970), at pp. 344-45).
-
139.
Dowson v. R. - [1983] 2 SCR 144 - 1983-10-13
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
His Worship Justice of the Peace Allen refused the appellant’s application for an adjournment and discontinued the proceedings. [...] For these reasons I would allow the appeal, and order that a mandamus issue and be directed to his Worship Justice of the Peace Allen to proceed with a hearing pursuant to s. 455.3 of the Criminal Code on the nine charges contained in the information of the appellant Dowson.
-
140.
Parkes v. The Queen - [1956] SCR 768 - 1956-10-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
As to this, I refer to what was said by Sir Charles Fitzpatrick C.J., with whom Duff J. (as he then was) agreed, in Allen v. The King[12]:— [...] While the trial referred to in Allen’s Case was before a jury, these remarks, in my opinion, apply with equal force to a hearing such as this before a single judge where the reasons delivered indicate that he relied, at least in part, upon evidence which was not properly before him.
-
141.
Spencer v. Alaska Packers Association - (1904) 35 SCR 362 - 1904-11-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
Stephen Allen Spencer (Defendant) Appellant; and The Alaska Packers Association (Plaintiffs) Respondent. [...] Now before discussing the case of Allen v. Flood[5], and what was decided therein, there are two observations of a general character which I wish to make, and one is to repeat what I have very often said before, that every judgment must be read as applicable to the particular facts proved, or assumed to be proved, since the
-
142.
Imrie v. Archibald - (1895) 25 SCR 368 - 1895-03-11
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
Jones v. Beck[7]; Fisher on Mortgages[8]; Story's Equity Jurisprudence[9]; Jones on Mortgages[10]; Allen v. Clark[11]. [...] [13] 12 Allen [Mass.] 472. [14] 8 Allen [Mass.] 557. [15] 13 Allen [Mass.] 168.
-
143.
Confederation Life Ass. Of Canada v. O'Donnell - (1886) 13 SCR 218 - 1886-11-08
Supreme Court JudgmentsInsurance
See Ganton v. Size[4]; Higham v. Ridgway[5]; Bewley v. Atkinson[6]; Massey v. Allen[7]. [...] The cases of Ganton v. Size[14] and Massey v. Allen[15] are in point and conclusive as authorities shewing that this evidence ought not to have been admitted.
-
144.
Danaher v. Peters - (1889) 17 SCR 44 - 1889-06-14
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Jack, Recorder of the City of St. John for the respondents, cited the following cases and authorities: Sharp v. Dawes[14]; Pearse v. Morrice[15]; Le Feuvre v. Miller[16]; Siddell v. Vickers[17]; The People v. Allen[18]; [...] Solicitor for respondents: J. Allen Jack. [1] 50 Vic. (N.B.) Ch. 4.
-
145.
Ross v. Hunter - (1882) 7 SCR 289 - 1882-03-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
On this point I will cite Allen v. Seckham[7]. It is only in equity that notice is a defence; and a purchaser without notice is protected in equity. [...] Morland v. Cook[17]; Allen v. Seckham[18]; Dart V. & P.[19]. There could be no revocation of a license to do an act executed. [...] [28] Allen v. Seckham 11 Ch. D. 795. [29] See observations of Alderson, B., in Whitbread v. Jordan, 1 Y. & C. 203, and 1 Story Eq. 400.
-
146.
Holt Cargo Systems Inc. v. ABC Containerline N.V. (Trustees of) - 2001 SCC 90 - [2001] 3 SCR 907 - 2001-12-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsCourts
3 S.C.R. 1077; Hunt v. T&N PLC, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 289; Tolofson v. Jensen, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1022; Canada Southern Railway Co. v. Gebhard, 109 U.S. 527 (1883); Allen v. Hanson (1890), 18 S.C.R. 667; Re Breakwater Co. (1914), 33 O.L.R. 65; Re E. H. Clarke & Co., [1923] 1 D.L.R. 716; Re Stewart & Matthews, Ltd. and [...] 79 Further, Canadian law has always recognized that initiation of foreign bankruptcy proceedings does not prevent concurrent insolvency proceedings in Canada: see Castel, supra, at p. 565; Allen v. Hanson (1890), 18 S.C.R. 667; Re Breakwater Co. (1914), 33 O.L.R. 65 (H.C.), and Re E. H. Clarke & Co., [1923] 1 D.L.R. 716 [...] The existence of two sets of proceedings obviously raises the spectre of conflicting decisions or approaches, although as noted in 1890 by Ritchie C.J. of this Court in Allen, supra, at p. 674, it is “the duty of the courts of both countries to see no conflict should arise”.
-
147.
St. Louis v.The Queen - (1896) 25 SCR 649 - 1896-02-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsEvidence
[10] 5 Allen (Mass.) 169. [11] See per Lord Eldon in Barker v.Ray, 2 Russ. 63; and Best on Evidence, par 414. [...] [40] 5 Allen (Mass.) 169. [41] 15 Conn. 377. [42] 1 Gill (Md.) 172. [...] [52] 5 Allen (Mass.) 169. [53] Anon. 1 Ld. Raym. 731. [54] 10 Mod. 8.
-
148.
Colpits v. The Queen - [1965] SCR 739 - 1965-06-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
The application of the subsection, as pointed out by the learned justice in appeal, has been considered frequently in this Court and I think it may be said that the decisions in Allen v. The King[12], Gouin v. The King[13], Brooks v. The King[14], Lizotte v. The King[15], and Schmidt v. The King[16], are authoritative. [...] The proposition in Allen v. The King as stated by Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, C.J., at p. 339, in reference to the section of the Code then if effect, was:
-
149.
Boucher v. The Queen - [1955] SCR 16 - 1954-12-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
The infringement of these rights was, in my opinion, a substantial wrong, within the meaning of section 1014 (2) of the Criminal Code, and accordingly that provision has no application to this case: Makin v. Attorney General for New South Wales[22]; Allen v. The King[23]; Northey v. The King[24]. [...] a character that the appellant was deprived of his right to the verdict of a jury following a trial according to law and such deprivation is of necessity 'a substantial wrong, an argument which would have required a 'careful examination of the judgments in such cases as Allen v. The King[31] and Northey v. The King[32].
-
150.
Canadian Pacific Rway. Co., v. Albin Idington J - (1919) 59 SCR 151 - 1919-10-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsTransportation
The learned authors of Browne & Allen on Compensation (2 ed., p. 101) suggest that [...] The English authorities are collected in Browne and Allen on Compensation (2 ed.) ubi sup. and at p. 116; 6 Halsbury Laws of England, No. 36 and Nos. 49 and 53; and Cripps on Compensation (5 ed.), pp. 107-8 and 146.