Toronto Junction (Town) v. Christie

Toronto Junction (Town) v. Christie

Where an appeal is from an arbitration under a statute that directs the court to pronounce such judgment as the arbitrators should have given, the statute supplies sufficient notice so that the appellate court may increase damages in favour of the respondent without a cross-appeal; otherwise the usual cross-appeal rule applies.

Citation
(1895) 25 SCR 551
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: The Corporation of the Town of Toronto Junction; Respondent/defendant: David D. Christie
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 December 1895
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Arbitration Award Under Ontario Municipal Act / Final Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment varied to increase award to $1,866.20 with interest from October 19, 1893 in favour of respondent.
Legal Topics
Damages, Arbitration, Cross Appeal Rule, Appellate Jurisdiction, Statutory Compensation
Source Language
English
Municipal Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Property Law Appeals Damages Arbitration Cross Appeal Rule +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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Corporation of the Town of Toronto Junction

Appellant/plaintiff

David D. Christie

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Arbitration Award Under Ontario Municipal Act / Final Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an appellate court may increase damages in favour of a respondent without a cross-appeal
  2. 2 Scope of appellate power on appeal from an arbitration under statute requiring the court to pronounce judgment as arbitrators should have given
  3. 3 Whether speculative benefits may be deducted from compensation

Ratio Decidendi

Where an appeal is from an arbitration under a statute that directs the court to pronounce such judgment as the arbitrators should have given, the statute supplies sufficient notice so that the appellate court may increase damages in favour of the respondent without a cross-appeal; otherwise the usual cross-appeal rule applies.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment varied to increase award to $1,866.20 with interest from October 19, 1893 in favour of respondent.

Orders

  • Award increased to $1,866.20 with interest from October 19, 1893 and costs to respondent
  • Appeal dismissed with costs