Recherche avancée

Syntaxe: "", OU, ET, EXACT(), /p, /s, /n
(AAAA ou AAAA-MM ou AAAA-MM-JJ)
Trier par : Pertinence Date

2,367 résultat(s)

  • 1,976.

    Burris v. Rhind - (1899) 29 SCR 498 - 1899-06-05

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Contrat

    The respondent William, then seventeen years of age, • remained at home.   [...]  After George's death William undertook the working of the farm, [Page 500]   [...]  Upon the return of the deed to William, the plaintiff, who was postmaster at the place where William resided, obtained thereby notice of its arrival.

  • 1,977.

    Carroll v. Erie County Natural Gas and Fuel Co. - (1899) 29 SCR 591 - 1899-06-05

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Action

    Samuel S. Carroll and William E. Carroll (Plaintiffs) Appellants; and

  • 1,978.

    Hyde v. Lindsay - (1899) 29 SCR 595 - 1899-06-05

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Successions

    We are therefore of opinion that the appeal should be allowed with costs before all the courts and that this action be referred to William L. Scott, Esquire, one of the masters of the High Court of Justice of Ontario, at Ottawa, to take an account of the amount reasonably and properly paid or incurred by appellant as such

  • 1,979.

    Williams v. Bartling et al. - (1899) 29 SCR 548 - 1899-06-05

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Responsabilité civile

    Williams v. Bartling et al., (1899) 29 SCR 548 Supreme Court of Canada   [...]  William v. Bartling (1899) 29 SCR 548 Date: 1899-06-05 Josiah Williams (Plaintiff)   [...]  William W. Bartling and James C. Bartling (Defendants) Respondents

  • 1,980.

    Zwicker v. Feindel - (1899) 29 SCR 516 - 1899-06-05

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Vente

    Burrowes v. Locke[2], at page 474; Williams v. Williams[3], at page 857; Berry v. Peek:[4], at page 360; Mills v. Fox[5], at pages 162-166; Hammersley v. De Biel[6], at pages 87-88; Hutlon v. Rossiter[7], at page 18.

  • 1,981.

    Zwicker v. Zwicker - (1899) 29 SCR 527 - 1899-06-05

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Contrat

    causing it to be recorded, paying his share of the cost thereof, and in taking possession and claiming under it the property of Joseph Zwicker, prevent him from setting up any title inconsistent with the conveyance in question. 1 Williams on Executors, (9 ed.) 344, 345; Kenrick v. Burgess[7]; Whitehall v. Squire[8].

  • 1,982.

    Norwich Union Fire Ins. Co. v. LeBell - (1899) 29 SCR 470 - 1899-05-30

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Assurance

    Williams Personal Property (10 ed.) pp. 8 and 37. Lingley v. Queen Ins. Co.[19].

  • 1,983.

    Quebec Montmorency & Charlevoix Railway Co. v. Gibsone - (1899) 29 SCR 340 - 1899-02-22

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Expropriation

    WILLIAM WARING PRIMROSE GIBSONE AND OTHERS (PLAINTIFFS PAR REPRISE D'INSTANCE)   [...]  WILLIAM WARING PRIMROSE GIBSONE AND OTHERS (PLAINTIFFS PAR REPRISE D'INSTANCE)

  • 1,984.

    The Queen v. Ogilvie - (1899) 29 SCR 299 - 1899-02-22

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Contrat

    Reference was also made to Williams v. Rawlinson[12], per Best C. J. at page 371; Harding v. Tifft[13], at page 464 to 466 as to undisclosed intention; Stone v. Seymour[14]; Robson v. McKoin[15]; Plomer v. Long[16]; Gordon v. Hobart[17]; Ex parte Whitworth[18]; Monger on Appropriation, p. 75 and cases there cited; Stamford

  • 1,985.

    Common v. McArthur - (1898) 29 SCR 239 - 1898-12-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Droit commercial

    WILLIAM J. COMMON, ês qualité (PETITIONER) Appellant; And COLIN MCARTHUR, (CONTESTANT)   [...]  In January, 1897, the company had become insolvent and a winding-up order was made against it, the appellant William J. Common being appointed liquidator.

  • 1,986.

    Roberts v. Hawkins - (1898) 29 SCR 218 - 1898-12-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Responsabilité civile

    DAVID ROBERTS AND WILLIAM THOMPSON (DEFENDANTS) Appellants; And HENRY HAWKINS, ês qualité (PLAINTIFF)   [...]  Was said injury caused by any fault or imprudence of said Herbert William Ball, and if so, state in what the same consisted?   [...]  Did said Herbert William Ball persist in remaining at the spot where the accident happened, notwithstanding defendants' warning asto the danger?

  • 1,987.

    Commercial Union Assurance Co. v. Temple - (1898) 29 SCR 206 - 1898-11-21

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Assurance

    Solicitor for the respondent: William Pugsley. [1] 12 Can. S. C. R. 446.

  • 1,988.

    Makins v. Piggott & Inglis - (1898) 29 SCR 188 - 1898-11-21

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Responsabilité civile

    Wallace Nesbitt, (Gauld with him,) for the appellant, cited McGibbon v. The Northern Railway Co.[1]; Williams v. Eady[2]; Scott v. London and St. Katherine Docks Co.[3] at page 601; Broom’s Legal Maxims 298; Snyder v. Wheeling Electrical Company[4]; Beven on Negligence, 561; Pollock on Texts, (5 ed.) pp. 21-41; Clark v.

  • 1,989.

    Hyde v. Lindsay - (1898) 29 SCR 99 - 1898-11-02

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Appel

    See Hurtubise v. Desmarteau[1]; Couture v. Bouchard[2]; Williams v. Irvine[3]; Cowen v. Evans[4].   [...]  In the case of Williams v. Irvine[7], the action had been instituted in 1890, tried in June, 1891, and judgment reserved, subsequently given on the 17th November, 1891.

  • 1,990.

    Simpson et al. v. Palliser - (1898) 29 SCR 6 - 1898-10-10

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Appel

    WILLIAM JOHN SIMPSON AND OTHERS (DEFENDANTS) Appellant; And JOSEPH PALLISER (PLAINTIFF)

  • 1,991.

    Grand Trunk Railway Co. of Canada v. Anderson - (1898) 28 SCR 541 - 1898-06-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Transport

    On the 8th of February, 1895, one William McKenzie purchased from the railway company a return-ticket from the Village of Ailsa Craig, a station on the main line of the Grand Trunk Railway, to the City of London.

  • 1,992.

    Jordan v. Provincial Provident Institution - (1898) 28 SCR 554 - 1898-06-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Assurance

    We make special reference to the words of Sir William Ritchie, C.J., in FitzRandolph v. The Mutual Relief Society of Nova Scotia[11] at page 336.   [...]   avoid the policy if a statement of a material fact contained in the declaration is untrue, even though not to the knowledge of the assured; Porter, Insurance, (2 ed.) page 140; Macdonald v. Law Union Fire and Life Insurance Company[19]; Bunyon, Life Insurance, p. 41; Cooke, Life Insurance, p. 35; Duckett v. Williams[20].

  • 1,993.

    Murray v. Jenkins - (1898) 28 SCR 565 - 1898-06-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Vente

    We contend that the memorandum in writing is insufficient under the statute of frauds; Williams v. Jordan[10]; Agnew, Statute of Frauds, p. 258.

  • 1,994.

    Province of Ontario & Province of Quebec v. Dominion of Canada. In re common School Fund & Lands - (1898) 28 SCR 609 - 1898-06-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Droit constitutionnel

    Randall,[7]; Ingram v. Milnes,[8]; Smith v. Wilson,[9]; Bhear v. Harradine,[10]; Williams v. Wilson et al.[11]."   [...]  Signed, William McDougall, Commisssioner.' And then Mr. Shehyn continues:—   [...]  The question was passed upon by the executive on two or three different occasions, and it was treated as such, and the reason assigned by Mr. William MacDougall

  • 1,995.

    Smith v. The Saint John Railway Co. / Consolidated Electric Co. v. Atlantic Trust Co. / Consolidated Electric Co. v. Pratt - (1898) 28 SCR 603 - 1898-06-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Appel

    Solicitor for the appellants: William Pugsley. Solicitor for the respondents, The St. John City Railway Company and others: Arthur I. Trueman.

  • 1,996.

    Wallace v. Lea - (1898) 28 SCR 595 - 1898-06-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Droit des biens

    Margaret Wallace and William Wallace, Her Husband (Defendants) Appellants

  • 1,997.

    Ostrom v. Sills - (1898) 28 SCR 485 - 1898-05-14

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Droit des biens

    Clute Q.C. and Williams for the respondents. The principles applicable to public waters do not extend to the flow of mere surface water.   [...]  Solicitors for the respondent: Clute & Williams. [1] 24 Ont. App. R. 526.

  • 1,998.

    Cummings v. Taylor - (1898) 28 SCR 337 - 1898-05-06

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Contrat

    William Cummings & Sons (Defendants) Appellants And Robert Taylor and Bauld Gibson & Co. (Plaintiffs)   [...]  William Cummings & Son being creditors of Neil McKinnon received the assets under the deed on account of the claim due to them by McKinnon and for which they were preferred. 2ndly.   [...]  After that determination the plaintiff Taylor instituted these proceedings, making the insolvent trustee under the assignment, and William Cummings & Sons and the Peoples' Bank of Halifax, the latter having received benefits under it, defendants, by which they sought:—

  • 1,999.

    MacKenzie v. Building & Loan Association - (1898) 28 SCR 407 - 1898-05-06

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Priorités et hypothèques

    William MacKenzie (Defendant) Appellant; and The Building & Loan Association (Plaintiffs) Respondents.   [...]  GWYNNE J.—By an indenture of lease bearing date the first day of July, 1885, James Austin and William Arthurs did demise and let unto one William Snowden Thompson certain lands and tenements situate in the city of Toronto, particularly described in the said indenture, whereof they, the said James Austin and William Arthurs   [...]  By an indenture of demise by way of mortgage made upon the 10th day of November, 1885, the said William Snowden Thompson did assign and transfer unto the Building and Loan Association (the plaintiffs in

  • 2,000.

    Goodwin v. The Queen - (1898) 28 SCR 273 - 1898-03-08

    Jugements de la Cour suprême [ Anglais ]
    Contrat

    See Eads v. Williams[25] at page 686; Ellison [Page 282] v. Bray[26].