Brady v. Stewart

Brady v. Stewart

At the time of purchase the shares had been declared forfeited and the purchaser knew litigation was necessary; therefore the shares were litigious rights under Art.1583 and under Art.1582 the appellant could only recover the price he paid with interest. The Art.1584 §4 exception does not apply by virtue of a judgment in a separate but similar case; it applies only to the particular demand confirmed or ready for judgment.

Citation
(1887) 15 SCR 82
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Hugh Brady; Respondents/defendants (liquidators of St. Gabriel Mutual Building Society): Michael Stewart et al
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 June 1887
Procedural Posture
Civil: Mandamus/shareholder Dispute / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal Side)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs (judgment of Court of Queen's Bench and Superior Court affirmed)
Legal Topics
Litigious Rights, Sale of Rights, Forfeiture, Mandamus, Statutory Interpretation (civil Code)
Source Language
English
Civil Law Corporate/company Law Property Law Litigious Rights Sale of Rights Forfeiture Mandamus Statutory Interpretation (civil Code)

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hugh Brady

Appellant/plaintiff

Michael Stewart et al

Respondents/defendants (liquidators of St. Gabriel Mutual Building Society)

Procedural Posture

Civil: Mandamus/shareholder Dispute / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal Side)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the purchased shares were 'litigious rights' within Art.1583 Civil Code of Quebec at time of purchase
  2. 2 Whether purchaser of such rights is limited to recovery of purchase price with interest under Art.1582 C.C.
  3. 3 Whether the exception in Art.1584 §4 applies where a judgment in a separate test case declared similar forfeitures invalid

Ratio Decidendi

At the time of purchase the shares had been declared forfeited and the purchaser knew litigation was necessary; therefore the shares were litigious rights under Art.1583 and under Art.1582 the appellant could only recover the price he paid with interest. The Art.1584 §4 exception does not apply by virtue of a judgment in a separate but similar case; it applies only to the particular demand confirmed or ready for judgment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs (judgment of Court of Queen's Bench and Superior Court affirmed)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to respondents