Johnston v. Canadian Credit Men's Trust Association

Johnston v. Canadian Credit Men's Trust Association

Section 9 of the Magistrates Act must be read to include public officers performing executive duties; the term 'officer' is not restricted to judicial officers and such officers are entitled, subject to the section's conditions, to immunity for acts done under the supposed authority of a statute even if the statute is later held ultra vires.

Citation
[1932] SCR 219
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Alexander Johnston; Appellant/defendant: Found; Appellant/defendant: Motherwell; Appellant/defendant: Mackie; Respondent/plaintiff: Canadian Credit Men's Trust Association
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 March 1931
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (trespass and Loss of Profits) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia; Remitted to Trial Subject to Directions
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgments below set aside; appellants declared 'officers' within meaning of Magistrates Act s.9; matter remitted for trial with directions.
Legal Topics
Immunity for Acts Under Ultra Vires Statute, Interpretation of 'officer' in Magistrates Act S.9, Scope of Public Officer Immunity
Source Language
English
Statutory Interpretation Administrative Law Constitutional Law Tort Law Immunity for Acts Under Ultra Vires Statute Interpretation of 'officer' in Magistrates Act S.9 Scope of Public Officer Immunity

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Johnston

Appellant/defendant

Found

Appellant/defendant

Motherwell

Appellant/defendant

Mackie

Appellant/defendant

Canadian Credit Men's Trust Association

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (trespass and Loss of Profits) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia; Remitted to Trial Subject to Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the term 'officer' in s.9 of the Magistrates Act is limited to judicial officers
  2. 2 Whether public officers performing executive duties are immune from suit for acts done under the supposed authority of an ultra vires statute under s.9
  3. 3 Whether the action should be dismissed as effectively disposed of by the legal ruling on immunity

Ratio Decidendi

Section 9 of the Magistrates Act must be read to include public officers performing executive duties; the term 'officer' is not restricted to judicial officers and such officers are entitled, subject to the section's conditions, to immunity for acts done under the supposed authority of a statute even if the statute is later held ultra vires.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgments below set aside; appellants declared 'officers' within meaning of Magistrates Act s.9; matter remitted for trial with directions.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs.
  • Judgments of the Court of Appeal and McDonald J. reversed to the extent indicated and appellants declared 'officers' under s.9 of the Magistrates Act.