Lapointe v. Montreal Police Benevolant & Pension Society

Lapointe v. Montreal Police Benevolant & Pension Society

The appeal was quashed because only the first monthly instalment of $62.50 was the certain amount in controversy; contingent future pension rights cannot be aggregated or valued by actuarial tables to meet the jurisdictional monetary threshold.

Citation
(1904) 35 SCR 5
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Louis G. Lapointe; Defendant/respondent: Montreal Police Benevolent and Pension Society
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 May 1904
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion to Quash Appeal for Want of Jurisdiction; Appeal From Court of King's Bench (quebec)
Outcome
Appeal quashed for want of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Life Pension, Amount in Controversy, Actuarial Valuation, Jurisdictional Threshold
Source Language
English
Civil Pensions Appeal Jurisdiction Life Pension Amount in Controversy Actuarial Valuation Jurisdictional Threshold

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Louis G. Lapointe

Plaintiff/appellant

Montreal Police Benevolent and Pension Society

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion to Quash Appeal for Want of Jurisdiction; Appeal From Court of King's Bench (quebec)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court of Canada had jurisdiction where plaintiff sought declaration and ongoing life pension but only the first instalment was certain
  2. 2 Whether actuarial tables can be used to convert a contingent future pension into a present amount in controversy exceeding the jurisdictional threshold

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was quashed because only the first monthly instalment of $62.50 was the certain amount in controversy; contingent future pension rights cannot be aggregated or valued by actuarial tables to meet the jurisdictional monetary threshold.

Court Disposition

Appeal quashed for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Appeal quashed with costs as if quashed on motion in limine.