Langelier v. Charlebois

Langelier v. Charlebois

Because the intervenant had an insurable interest when the first policy was issued, became fee owner by sheriff's sale before the loss, and was the sole party with interest at the time of the fire — and because the sale terminated the lease and the insurer recognized the intervenant — the intervenant was entitled to the policy proceeds; the transactions were not shown to be fraudulent as against creditors and the appellant who failed to oppose the sheriff's sale cannot now contest payment.

Citation
(1903) 34 SCR 1
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff (contestant): Jean Chrysostome Langelier; Respondent / Intervenant: Antoine Aime Charlebois; Garnishee: The Commercial Union Assurance Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 October 1903
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench (appeal Side), Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of King's Bench (appeal side) declaring intervenant entitled to the deposited funds affirmed
Legal Topics
Insurable Interest, Sheriff's Sale, Lease, Fraudulent Conveyance, Estoppel, Beneficiary, Assignment of Policy
Source Language
English
Insurance Property Contract Trust Execution of Judgment Insurable Interest Sheriff's Sale Lease +4 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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jean Chrysostome Langelier

Appellant / Plaintiff (contestant)

Antoine Aime Charlebois

Respondent / Intervenant

The Commercial Union Assurance Company

Garnishee

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench (appeal Side), Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the intervenant (lessee and purchaser at sheriff's sale) was entitled to the proceeds of the fire insurance policy
  2. 2 Whether the lease and related transactions were fraudulent as against the lessor's creditors
  3. 3 Whether a notation of "in trust" and insurer's recognition of a beneficiary can defeat seizing creditors

Ratio Decidendi

Because the intervenant had an insurable interest when the first policy was issued, became fee owner by sheriff's sale before the loss, and was the sole party with interest at the time of the fire — and because the sale terminated the lease and the insurer recognized the intervenant — the intervenant was entitled to the policy proceeds; the transactions were not shown to be fraudulent as against creditors and the appellant who failed to oppose the sheriff's sale cannot now contest payment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of King's Bench (appeal side) declaring intervenant entitled to the deposited funds affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Sum of $3,500 deposited by The Commercial Union Assurance Company to be paid to intervenant Antoine-Aimé Charlebois