Mazur v. Imperial Investment Corporation

Mazur v. Imperial Investment Corporation

Majority held the plaintiff had taken the note for full value and was a holder in due course; the trial judge and Court of Appeal made factual findings that the maker's signature on the blank created prima facie authority to complete the instruments and the completion was not shown to be contrary to that authority, so the note was enforceable against the maker.

Citation
[1963] SCR 281
Parties
Defendant/appellant: John Mazur; Plaintiff/respondent: Imperial Investment Corporation Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 May 1963
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (collection) / Decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Holder in Due Course, Promissory Note Signed in Blank, Authority to Complete Instrument, Bills of Exchange Act Ss.31 32, Accommodation Party, Fraud, Conditional Delivery
Source Language
English
Bills of Exchange Negotiable Instruments Commercial Law Contract Law Holder in Due Course Promissory Note Signed in Blank Authority to Complete Instrument Bills of Exchange Act Ss.31 32 +3 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Mazur

Defendant/appellant

Imperial Investment Corporation Ltd.

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (collection) / Decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was a holder in due course of the promissory note
  2. 2 Whether a note signed in blank and completed by the plaintiff was filled strictly in accordance with the authority given under s.32 of the Bills of Exchange Act
  3. 3 Whether the delivery was conditional and thus prevented enforcement of the note

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held the plaintiff had taken the note for full value and was a holder in due course; the trial judge and Court of Appeal made factual findings that the maker's signature on the blank created prima facie authority to complete the instruments and the completion was not shown to be contrary to that authority, so the note was enforceable against the maker.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta affirmed