Advanced Search
- All Databases (4,782)
- Decisions (2,369)
- Resources (2,169)
2,369 result(s)
-
2,026.
Niagara District Fruit Growers Stock Co. v. Walker - (1896) 26 SCR 629 - 1896-12-09
Supreme Court JudgmentsGuarantee and suretyship
But I do think that the contract of suretyship is, as expressed by Lord Westbury in Williams v. Bayley12, one which “should be based upon the free and voluntary agency of the individual who enters into it.”
-
2,027.
Turcotte v. Dansereau - (1896) 26 SCR 578 - 1896-11-05
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
[19] Williams v. Twine 22 Can. S. C. R. 108.
-
2,028.
News Printing Co. of Toronto v. Macrae - (1896) 26 SCR 695 - 1896-10-26
Supreme Court JudgmentsAppeal
Upon the application of the above named defendants, upon hearing read the affidavit of William Henry Irving, the affidavit of Hubert H. Macrae and the exhibits therein referred to, and the defendants’ counsel undertaking to get the appeal down for the October sittings of the Supreme Court if the rules or practice of the
-
2,029.
In Re Provincial Fisheries - (1896) 26 SCR 444 - 1896-10-13
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
All that can be said is to draw your Lordships' attention to the well known rule in the construction of statutes, which was put strongly by Sir William Richards when he said that when the legislature changed their phraseology it was to be assumed they changed it intentionally, and for some reason, whatever the reason was,
-
2,030.
Carter v. Long & Bisby - (1896) 26 SCR 430 - 1896-06-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsTrust
The $201, the unexpended balance of the advances made by the respondents, was of course a sum of trust money; that it was a balance of the last remittance appears from the evidence of William T. Smith, who proves that when the Smiths proposed to draw it out of the bank in order to return it to the respondents, the bank
-
2,031.
Conger v. Kennedy - (1896) 26 SCR 397 - 1896-06-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
On the 11th of December, 1889, at Napanee, in the province of Ontario, William Cox Allan was married to Janet C. Conger, then a widow. [...] At the time of the marriage William Cox Allan was domiciled in the North-West Territories, having his residence at Macleod, in those territories.
-
2,032.
Purdom v. Pavey & Company - (1896) 26 SCR 412 - 1896-06-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsAction
This action was brought by Pavey & Company on behalf of themselves and all other creditors of McKay & Davidson, and it was by their statement of claim alleged that the firm of McKay & Davidson was composed of William L. Mackay and Ebenezer Davidson; that they carried on business as merchants in Ontario, and on
-
2,033.
Richards v. Bank of Nova Scotia - (1896) 26 SCR 381 - 1896-06-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsAgency
William Richards (Defendant) Appellant And The Bank of Nova Scotia (Plaintiff)
-
2,034.
Warner v. Don - (1896) 26 SCR 388 - 1896-06-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
It was decided in 1856 by Lord Hatherly when V. C. Sir William Page Wood that if an instrument which conveys an interest in land conveys also machinery
-
2,035.
Williams v. Leonard & Sons - (1896) 26 SCR 406 - 1896-06-06
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
Williams v. Leonard & Sons, (1896) 26 SCR 406 Supreme Court of Canada [...] Williams v. Leonard & Sons, (1896) 26 S.C.R. 406 Date: 1896-06-06 A.R. Williams (Plaintiff) Appellant; [...] By his statement of claim the appellant asserted a double title, claiming first under a purchase from one William Yates, a manufacturer carrying on business under the name of the “London Machine Tool Company,” and, secondly, under a chattel mortgage which the appellant alleged to have been duly registered, and under which
-
2,036.
Carroll v. Provincial Natural Gas & Fuel Co. of Ontario - (1896) 26 SCR 181 - 1896-05-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
Samuel S. Carroll and William E. Carroll (Plaintiffs) Appellants; and
-
2,037.
Crawford v. Brody - (1896) 26 SCR 345 - 1896-05-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
Clark v. Clark[3]; Fisher v. Anderson[4]; Williams on Executors[5]; Jarmyn on Wills[6]; Gordon v. Gordon[7]; Bathurst v. Errington[8]; Rhodes v. Rhodes[9]. [...] To James William the sum of 25 pounds. After the aforesaid claims are paid, lot number five in the third concession falls into the hands of Adam Nixon.
-
2,038.
Dinner v. Humberstone - (1896) 26 SCR 252 - 1896-05-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
William Humberstone (Plaintiff) Respondent. 1896: February 27, 28; 1896: May 18.
-
2,039.
Rennie v. Block - (1896) 26 SCR 356 - 1896-05-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsPriorities and hypothecs
Hugo Block and William Alexander (Defendants) Respondents. 1896: March 7, 9; 1896: May 18.
-
2,040.
Robertson v. Junkin - (1896) 26 SCR 192 - 1896-05-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
William J. Robertson, Executor of the Will of Samuel Junkin (Defendant) Appellant;
-
2,041.
The Queen v. Moss - (1896) 26 SCR 322 - 1896-05-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsConstitutional law
Crown is barred by the Nullum Tempus Act, 9 Greo. 3 ch. 16 (Imp.) Reg. v. McCormick[13]; Reg: v. Williams[14]; Attorney General v. The Midland Railway Co.[15].
-
2,042.
Charlebois v. Delap - (1896) 26 SCR 221 - 1896-03-28
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
This is so referred to by Vaughan Williams, J. in In re South American and Mexican Co.[26]
-
2,043.
The Northern Pacific Express Company v. Martin - (1896) 26 SCR 135 - 1896-03-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsCommercial law
William Martin and Others (Plaintiffs) Respondent. 1896: February 29; 1896: March 2; 1896: March 24.
-
2,044.
William Hamilton Manufacturing Co. v. Victoria Lumber & Manufacturing Co - (1896) 26 SCR 96 - 1896-03-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsContract
William Hamilton Manufacturing Co. v. Victoria Lumber & Manufacturing Co, (1896) 26 SCR 96 [...] William Hamilton Manufacturing Co. v. Victoria Lumber & Manufacturing Co, (1896) 26 S.C.R. 96 [...] The William Hamilton Manufacturing Company (Plaintiffs) Appellants; and
-
2,045.
Wilson v. Land Security Co. - (1896) 26 SCR 149 - 1896-03-24
Supreme Court JudgmentsSale
William D. Wilson (Defendant) Appellant; and The Land Security Company (Plaintiffs) Respondents.
-
2,046.
Agricultural Insurance Co. v. Sargeant - (1896) 26 SCR 29 - 1896-02-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsGuarantee and suretyship
The action was to recover the amount of a mortgage given by William Sargeant to secure $1,250, due by one J.H. Scriver up to 1st January, 1890, for arrears in his remittances of insurance premiums collected for the company. [...] One William Sargeant had been Scriver’s surety to a certain amount for the due payment by Scriver to the plaintiffs of the premiums received by him for them, and upon the 15th of the said month of October, for the purpose of securing payment of $1,250, part of the above debit, he executed the mortgage which is the subject
-
2,047.
Drysdale v. Dugas - (1896) 26 SCR 20 - 1896-02-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsProperty law
WILLIAM DRYSDALE (DEFENDANT) Appellant; And C. A. DUGAS (PLAINTIFF)
-
2,048.
Mayhew v. Stone - (1896) 26 SCR 58 - 1896-02-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsEstates
Solicitor for the appellant: William S. Stewart. Solicitor for the respondent: Francis L. Haszard.
-
2,049.
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].
-
2,050.
St. Louis v.The Queen - (1896) 25 SCR 649 - 1896-02-18
Supreme Court JudgmentsEvidence
It was vigorously assailed as early as in 1806 by Sir William D. Evans, in his notes to Pothier's Obligations, vol. 2, pp. 169, 337, quoted with approbation by Mr. Best in his learned treatise on Evidence. [...] Williams and Coleridge JJ. concurred. The last case I have been able to collect is The Attorney General v. The Dean and Cartons of Windsor in 1858[66], the only English case quoted by the respondent.