Pulos v. Lazanis and Kladis

Pulos v. Lazanis and Kladis

The Court held that an intervention is a judicial proceeding under s.46 and that jurisdiction is determined by the amount in controversy on the intervention; because the intervenor's claimed interest in the partnership exceeded the $2,000 statutory threshold, the Supreme Court had jurisdiction and the motion to quash was dismissed.

Citation
(1918) 57 SCR 337
Parties
Plaintiff Appellant: Harry Pulos; Defendant Respondent: George N. Lazanis; Defendant Respondent: Denis Lazanis; Intervening Party Respondent: Mary Kladis
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 November 1918
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion to Quash for Want of Jurisdiction on Appeal From Court of King's Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Intervention, Jurisdiction, Amount in Controversy, Saisie Arrêt, Revindication
Source Language
English
Appeal Civil Procedure Partnership Law Procedure for Intervention Intervention Jurisdiction Amount in Controversy Saisie Arrêt +1 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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harry Pulos

Plaintiff Appellant

George N. Lazanis

Defendant Respondent

Denis Lazanis

Defendant Respondent

Mary Kladis

Intervening Party Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion to Quash for Want of Jurisdiction on Appeal From Court of King's Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an intervention is a "judicial" proceeding within the meaning of section 46 of the Supreme Court Act
  2. 2 Whether the amount in controversy for Supreme Court jurisdiction is determined by the original main action or by the value of the intervention (intervenor's claim)
  3. 3 Whether the Court of Appeal's reversal of the Superior Court on the intervention raises a federal jurisdictional appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that an intervention is a judicial proceeding under s.46 and that jurisdiction is determined by the amount in controversy on the intervention; because the intervenor's claimed interest in the partnership exceeded the $2,000 statutory threshold, the Supreme Court had jurisdiction and the motion to quash was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Motion to quash for want of jurisdiction dismissed with costs.