Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
2,369 result(s)
-
901.
Cherneskey v. Armadale Publishers Ltd. - [1979] 1 SCR 1067 - 1978-11-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Publishing Association Ltd.[6], where the question was whether an interrogatory addressed to the state of mind of the defendant who had pleaded fair comment was admissible and after referring to the case of White & Co. v. Credit Reform Association and Credit Index Ltd.[7], Vaughan Williams L.J. said, at p. 413: [...] Speaking of the different considerations affecting the defence of "privilege" on the one hand and "fair comment" on the other, Vaughan Williams, L.J. said at p. 413:
-
902.
McInroy et al. v. The Queen - [1979] 1 SCR 588 - 1978-10-31
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Vide also Greenough v. Eccles[6], (per Williams J. p. 802.)) The only link between the two subsections of s. 9 is the concluding provision in subs. [...] (Williams J. at p. 802). Before dealing in detail with the phraseology of s. 9, it may be helpful to consider the basic evidentiary principles.
-
903.
Tuer v. R. - [1979] 1 SCR 17 - 1978-10-31
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
William Franklin Tuer (Plaintiff) Appellant; and Her Majesty The Queen (Defendants) Respondent.
-
904.
Moore v. The Queen - [1979] 1 SCR 195 - 1978-10-17
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Dr. Williams refers to the case of Hatton v. Treeby[4] as an illustration of this principle. [...] Dr. Williams effectively disposed of the argument in words which I should like to adopt, p. 473: [...] The views expressed by Dr. Williams were adopted in the New Zealand case of Elder v. Evans[9].
-
905.
Asamera Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Sea Oil & General Corporation et al. - [1979] 1 SCR 633 - 1978-10-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
Although in Williams v. Peel River Co. the market appears to have risen and then fallen, it seems that the plaintiff was only claiming, as damages for detention, the value at initial default less the value at judgment. [...] (Vide Dawson v. Helicopter Exploration Co. Ltd., supra; Pitfield & Co. Ltd. v. Jomac Gold Syndicate Ltd. et al.[30], at p. 165 (Ont. C.A.); Williams and Cameron v. Keyes and Pyramid Mining Co. Ltd.[31], at p. 568 (B.C.S.C.); Shaw v. Holland[32].) [...] But so far as the circumstances permit, they are to be the ground of conclusions of probability: Williams v. Peel River Land and Mineral Company Ltd. The case is analogous to that of a breach of covenant to re‑deliver shares and prima facie the defendants are held to have prevented the shares from remaining the property of
-
906.
Herman et al. v. Deputy Attorney General (Canada) - [1979] 1 SCR 729 - 1978-10-03
Supreme Court JudgmentsTaxation
William Bernard Herman, City Parking Canada Limited, The William Bernard Herman Trust, Musketeers Investments Limited, S.A., Columbus Holdings Limited, Columbus Development Corporation Limited, Dumas Investments Limited, S.A., and City Parking Holding Limited Appellants;
-
907.
Conklin v. Smith et al. - [1978] 2 SCR 1107 - 1978-06-29
Supreme Court JudgmentsTorts
William Conklin, Jr. (Plaintiff) Appellant; and Rodney Charles Smith and Phil Hall Ltd. (Defendants) Respondents.
-
908.
R. v. Olan et al. - [1978] 2 SCR 1175 - 1978-05-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Samuel L. Olan, William H. Hudson and Thomas R. Hartnett III (Defendants) Respondents.
-
909.
Attorney General (Que.) et al. v. Farrah - [1978] 2 SCR 638 - 1978-05-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Henkel, Q.C., for the interverior. The judgment of Laskin C.J. and Spence, Dickson and Estey JJ. was delivered by [...] Solicitor for the intervenor: William Henkel, Edmonton. [1] [1976] C.A. 467.
-
910.
Dukart v. Corporation of the District of Surrey - [1978] 2 SCR 1039 - 1978-05-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
The question as to whether an interest in land may be registered in more than one manner was considered in the case of Rystephaniuk v. Prosken[24], where Williams C.J.K.B. observed in respect of the Manitoba Real Property Act that:
-
911.
R. v. Sault Ste. Marie - [1978] 2 SCR 1299 - 1978-05-01
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Dr. Glanville Williams has written: “There is a half-way house between mens rea and strict responsibility which has not yet been properly utilized, and that is responsibility for negligence,” (Criminal Law (2d ed.): The General Part, p. 262). [...] It has done so by utilizing the very half-way house to which Dr. Williams refers, responsibility for negligence.
-
912.
Adams and al. v. McLeod and al. - [1978] 2 SCR 621 - 1978-03-21
Supreme Court JudgmentsFamily law
Bonnie Lynn Adams and William Walter Adams Appellants; and Libby McLeod and Irene Ramstead Respondents. [...] He was accompanied at that time by Bonnie Lynn Adams, his niece, the present appellant, and her husband, William Walter Adams, her co-appellant. [...] and at the same time a newly filed application for guardianship by William and Bonnie Adams was granted.
-
913.
Ibottson v. Kushner - [1978] 2 SCR 858 - 1978-03-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
Solicitors for the respondent: Byers & Williams, Picton. [1] [1914] A.C. 461.
-
914.
McInnis et al. v. Webb Real Estate Ltd. et al. - [1978] 2 SCR 1382 - 1978-03-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsCivil procedure
Alexander D. McInnis, William F. Meehan and T. Daniel Tramble, a partnership under the name of McInnis, Meehan & Tramble Appellants;
-
915.
Smith et al. v. McInnis et al. - [1978] 2 SCR 1357 - 1978-03-07
Supreme Court JudgmentsProfessional law
George I. Smith, Kenneth M. Matthews, William J. Grant, Lorne O. Clarke, Donald J. MacDonald, James C. Leefe, David R. Hubley and Wayne Anstey, a partnership under the name of Patterson, Smith, Matthews & Grant (Third Parties) Appellants; [...] Alexander D. McInnis, William F. Meehan and T. Daniel Tramble, a partnership under the name of Mclnnis, Meehan & Tramble (Defendants) Respondents. [...] In the same book, Glanville Williams expresses the opinion that the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act, 1945 (U.K.), is applicable to liability in contract as well as in tort.
-
916.
Attorney General (Que.) v. Kellogg’s Co. of Canada et al. - [1978] 2 SCR 211 - 1978-01-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Henkel, Q.C., for the Attorney-General of Alberta. Ken Lysyk, Q.C., and G.V. Peacock, for the Attorney-General of Saskatchewan.
-
917.
Dupond v. City of Montreal et al. - [1978] 2 SCR 770 - 1978-01-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Henkel, c.r., pour l’intervenant. Le jugement du juge en chef Laskin et des juges Spence et Dickson a été rendu par [...] Procureur de l’intervenant: William Henkel, Edmonton. [1] [1974] C.A. 402.
-
918.
Nova Scotia Board of Censors v. McNeil - [1978] 2 SCR 662 - 1978-01-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Donald G. Gibson and William M. Wilson for the appellants. Robert Murrant, Dereck M. Jones and B. Mclsaac for the respondent.
-
919.
Rathwell v. Rathwell - [1978] 2 SCR 436 - 1978-01-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsFamily law
Lloyd William Thomas Rathwell (Defendant) Appellant; and Helen Marie Rathwell (Plaintiff) Respondent.
-
920.
Simpsons-Sears Ltd. v. Provincial Secretary (N.B.) et al. - [1978] 2 SCR 869 - 1978-01-19
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Solicitor for the Attorney General for Alberta: William Henkel, Edmonton.
-
921.
Elliott v. The Queen - [1978] 2 SCR 393 - 1977-12-20
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
RITCHIE J.—The appellant and one Arthur James Williams were charged together on an indictment dated October 22, 1974, with the following offences: [...] third count against Elliott alone (a stay of proceedings having been entered with respect to Williams).
-
922.
Kirzner v. R. - [1978] 2 SCR 487 - 1977-12-14
Supreme Court JudgmentsCriminal law
Professor Glanville Williams in his work The Criminal Law, The General Part (2nd ed. 1961) at p. 785 says this:
-
923.
Cotroni v. Quebec Police Commission - [1978] 1 SCR 1048 - 1977-11-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsAdministrative law
Courts
Although the Code does not say it explicitly, it seems to me that the principle stated by Vaughan Williams J. in Re Armstrong[11], (cited in Poje[12], at p. 519) would apply and that the imprisonment should end ex debito justitiae as soon as the person incarcerated agrees to comply with the order of the court, just as the
-
924.
Public Service Board et al. v. Dionne et al. - [1978] 2 SCR 191 - 1977-11-30
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Henkel, Q.C., for the Attorney General for Alberta. The judgment of Laskin C.J. and Martland, Judson, Ritchie, Spence and Dickson JJ. was delivered by
-
925.
C.N.R. v. Williams - [1978] 1 SCR 1092 - 1977-11-25
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
Constitutional law
C.N.R. v. Williams, C.N. c. Williams, [1978] 1 SCR 1092, [1978] 1 RCS 1092 [...] C.N.R. v. Williams, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 1092 Date: 1977-11-25 Canadian National Railway Company (Defendant) Appellant; [...] Lawrence Angus Williams, an infant by his Guardian ad Litem, Robert Frederick Williams (Plaintiff) Respondent.