Rear v. The Imperial Bank of Canada

Rear v. The Imperial Bank of Canada

The appeal was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to prove proper presentment of the cheque to the correct ledgerkeeper; without such evidence non-presentment justified withdrawing the case from the jury and dismissing the action.

Citation
(1908) 42 SCR 222
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Rear; Respondent/defendant: The Imperial Bank of Canada
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 May 1908
Procedural Posture
Collection (banking) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada After Trial Judge Withdrew Case From Jury and Dismissed Action
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Customer Cheque, Presentment, Refusal to Pay, Non Presentment Defence, Damages
Source Language
English
Banks and Banking Commercial Law Civil Procedure Customer Cheque Presentment Refusal to Pay Non Presentment Defence Damages

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rear

Appellant/plaintiff

The Imperial Bank of Canada

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Collection (banking) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada After Trial Judge Withdrew Case From Jury and Dismissed Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the bank wrongfully refused to cash the cheque despite sufficient funds in drawer's account
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff proved proper presentment of the cheque to the proper officer of the bank
  3. 3 Whether non-presentment defence entitled the bank to dismissal as a matter of law

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to prove proper presentment of the cheque to the correct ledgerkeeper; without such evidence non-presentment justified withdrawing the case from the jury and dismissing the action.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • At trial the judge withdrew the case from the jury and dismissed the action with costs