Slater v. Badenach

Slater v. Badenach

The clause permitting the assignee to sell for cash or on credit does not, per se, invalidate the assignment or make it a fraudulent preference under R.S.O. ch.118 sec.2; absent evidence of fraud or collusion and given a finding that the deed was executed to pay creditors rateably, the assignment is valid and the appellate court must uphold the jury verdict.

Citation
(1884) 10 SCR 296
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: George T. Slater; Respondent / Plaintiff: William Badenach
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 June 1884
Procedural Posture
Interpleader Issue; Appeal From Court of Appeal of Ontario / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Disposition)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Assignment for Benefit of Creditors, Power to Sell on Credit, Fraudulent Preference, Statutory Interpretation R.s.o. Ch.118 Sec.2, Creditor Priorities
Source Language
English
Priorities and Hypothecs Trusts Insolvency Law Property Law Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Power to Sell on Credit Fraudulent Preference Statutory Interpretation R.s.o. Ch.118 Sec.2 +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George T. Slater

Appellant / Defendant

William Badenach

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Interpleader Issue; Appeal From Court of Appeal of Ontario / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Disposition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a clause authorizing the assignee to sell on credit invalidates an assignment for the benefit of creditors
  2. 2 Whether the assignment constituted a fraudulent preference or was void under Rev. St. O. ch.118 sec.2
  3. 3 What legal effect to give to the trustee’s discretion to sell for cash or on credit in absence of proven fraud

Ratio Decidendi

The clause permitting the assignee to sell for cash or on credit does not, per se, invalidate the assignment or make it a fraudulent preference under R.S.O. ch.118 sec.2; absent evidence of fraud or collusion and given a finding that the deed was executed to pay creditors rateably, the assignment is valid and the appellate court must uphold the jury verdict.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs