Thompson v. Coulter

Thompson v. Coulter

A prima facie case of liability was established by plaintiffs; the only direct evidence that the defendant paid the money to the deceased was the defendant's own testimony which, under R.S.O. 1897 c.73 s.10, required material corroboration; the surrounding circumstances did not corroborate payment and therefore the defendant could not obtain a decision in his favour on uncorroborated evidence; appeal allowed.

Citation
(1903) 34 SCR 261
Parties
Appellant Executor: William Thompson; Appellant Executor: Adam Pinch; Respondent Defendant: Thomas Coulter
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 November 1903
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (estate Claim) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the Divisional Court restored in favour of the plaintiffs (executors).
Legal Topics
Corroboration, Executors, Burden of Proof, Statutory Corroboration
Source Language
English
Estates Evidence Corroboration Executors Burden of Proof Statutory Corroboration

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Thompson

Appellant Executor

Adam Pinch

Appellant Executor

Thomas Coulter

Respondent Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (estate Claim) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant could obtain judgment on his own uncorroborated evidence in respect of a matter occurring before the death of the testator under R.S.O. 1897 c.73 s.10
  2. 2 Whether the circumstantial facts and conduct of the deceased constituted sufficient corroboration of the defendant's testimony that he paid the withdrawn money to the deceased
  3. 3 Whether a prima facie case of liability was established against the defendant by the plaintiffs' evidence

Ratio Decidendi

A prima facie case of liability was established by plaintiffs; the only direct evidence that the defendant paid the money to the deceased was the defendant's own testimony which, under R.S.O. 1897 c.73 s.10, required material corroboration; the surrounding circumstances did not corroborate payment and therefore the defendant could not obtain a decision in his favour on uncorroborated evidence; appeal allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the Divisional Court restored in favour of the plaintiffs (executors).

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs
  • Judgment of the Divisional Court restored