Killoran v. Monticello State Bank

Killoran v. Monticello State Bank

The instruments constituted valid, severable promissory notes (or at minimum the collateral agreement expressly treated transferees as holders in due course); the respondent bank, having taken the notes for value and being a holder in due course under the terms, was entitled to recover despite the sale being avoided between the original parties due to the horse's death.

Citation
(1921) 61 SCR 528
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: F. V. Killoran; Respondent / Plaintiff: The Monticello State Bank
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 February 1921
Procedural Posture
Collection / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Appellate Division affirmed.
Legal Topics
Conditional Sale Agreement, Promissory Notes, Holder in Due Course, Severability of Instrument, Risk of Loss on Specific Goods
Source Language
English
Bills of Exchange Sale of Goods Negotiability Commercial Law Conditional Sale Agreement Promissory Notes Holder in Due Course Severability of Instrument +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F. V. Killoran

Appellant / Defendant

The Monticello State Bank

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Collection / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the instruments were promissory notes or inseparable lien notes
  2. 2 Whether a collateral conditional sale agreement defeats rights of a transferee for value
  3. 3 Whether the death of the horse prior to transfer of property under the Sale of Goods Ordinance avoids obligation to pay transferees

Ratio Decidendi

The instruments constituted valid, severable promissory notes (or at minimum the collateral agreement expressly treated transferees as holders in due course); the respondent bank, having taken the notes for value and being a holder in due course under the terms, was entitled to recover despite the sale being avoided between the original parties due to the horse's death.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Appellate Division affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment of the Appellate Division affirmed.