The Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers Ry. Co. v. Morris

The Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers Ry. Co. v. Morris

Because the purchaser paid the adjudication price and no fraud or collusion was alleged, article 599 bars annulment of the sale; payment vested ownership under article 598 and any irregularity in selling beyond the amount necessary gives recourse against the officer or creditor, not against a bona fide purchaser.

Citation
(1887) 14 SCR 318
Parties
Appellant (petitioners En Nullité De Décret): The Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers Railroad Company; Respondent (adjudicataire): John L. Morris
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 May 1887
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal Side)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Execution Sale, Judicial Sale of Movables, Bona Fide Purchaser Protection, Nullity of Decree, Sale En Bloc of Shares, Fraud or Collusion
Source Language
English
Securities Civil Procedure Property Execution Law Execution Sale Judicial Sale of Movables Bona Fide Purchaser Protection Nullity of Decree +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers Railroad Company

Appellant (petitioners En Nullité De Décret)

John L. Morris

Respondent (adjudicataire)

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal Side)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an execution sale of multiple shares sold en bloc for an amount far exceeding the judgment debt can be annulled as against a purchaser who has paid the price
  2. 2 Whether a purchaser at a judicial sale of movables is protected against a petition to set aside the sale when no fraud or collusion is alleged
  3. 3 Whether an officer's sale beyond the amount necessary to satisfy the debt renders the sale null as against a bona fide purchaser

Ratio Decidendi

Because the purchaser paid the adjudication price and no fraud or collusion was alleged, article 599 bars annulment of the sale; payment vested ownership under article 598 and any irregularity in selling beyond the amount necessary gives recourse against the officer or creditor, not against a bona fide purchaser.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.