Joliette Election Case

Joliette Election Case

The appeal is dismissed: the April order suspended proceedings during Parliament so the trial, which legitimately commenced on November 22 (witnesses examined and essential admissions made), was within the extended six‑month period; adjournments by the trial judge were lawful under the Act; evidence established bribery by the appellant's agent sufficient to void the election; after petitioners withdrew their claim to the seat the judge acted properly in declining to hear recriminatory charges under s.42 and the refusal was not a basis to reverse the voiding of the election.

Citation
(1888) 15 SCR 458
Parties
Appellant (sitting Member/respondent Below): Edouard Guilbault; Respondents (petitioners Below): Anthyme Dessert et al.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 December 1888
Procedural Posture
Election Petition Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment Avoiding Election
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; election declared void for corrupt practices by agents; report to Speaker of the House of Commons
Legal Topics
Commencement of Trial and Statutory Time Limits, Effect of Parliamentary Session on Limitation Periods, Adjournment and Judge's Power to Adjourn, Agency and Vicarious Liability for Corrupt Practices, Recriminatory Charges (section 42), Jurisdiction and De Die in Diem Requirement
Source Language
English
Election Law Statutory Interpretation Administrative Procedure Criminal Law (bribery) Commencement of Trial and Statutory Time Limits Effect of Parliamentary Session on Limitation Periods Adjournment and Judge's Power to Adjourn Agency and Vicarious Liability for Corrupt Practices +2 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edouard Guilbault

Appellant (sitting Member/respondent Below)

Anthyme Dessert et al.

Respondents (petitioners Below)

Procedural Posture

Election Petition Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment Avoiding Election

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial was commenced within the six months statutory period given the stay during Parliament
  2. 2 Whether a judge may adjourn an election trial from time to time and suspend sittings without ousting jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether there was sufficient evidence of agency and bribery to justify annulling the election

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed: the April order suspended proceedings during Parliament so the trial, which legitimately commenced on November 22 (witnesses examined and essential admissions made), was within the extended six‑month period; adjournments by the trial judge were lawful under the Act; evidence established bribery by the appellant's agent sufficient to void the election; after petitioners withdrew their claim to the seat the judge acted properly in declining to hear recriminatory charges under s.42 and the refusal was not a basis to reverse the voiding of the election.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; election declared void for corrupt practices by agents; report to Speaker of the House of Commons

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to respondents
  • Election of Edouard Guilbault declared null and void due to corrupt practices by his agents