Duplessis v. Edmonton Portland Cement Co.

Duplessis v. Edmonton Portland Cement Co.

The defendant failed to discharge the burden of proving that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course or that the note lacked consideration or was procured by misrepresentation; therefore the judgment for the plaintiff was maintained and the appeal dismissed.

Citation
(1917) 55 SCR 623
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Duplessis; Respondent / Plaintiff: The Edmonton Portland Cement Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 October 1917
Procedural Posture
Appeal (promissory Note / Bills and Notes) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta; Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Supreme Court of Alberta, Appellate Division, affirmed.
Legal Topics
Notice, Holder in Due Course, Consideration, Misrepresentation, Promissory Note, Dual Capacity
Source Language
English
Bills of Exchange Negotiable Instruments Contract Law Evidence Notice Holder in Due Course Consideration Misrepresentation +2 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Duplessis

Appellant / Defendant

The Edmonton Portland Cement Company

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal (promissory Note / Bills and Notes) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta; Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the plaintiff a holder in due course?
  2. 2 Did the defendant prove misrepresentation or lack of consideration sufficient to defeat the note?
  3. 3 Effect of dual capacity on enforceability of the promissory note

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant failed to discharge the burden of proving that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course or that the note lacked consideration or was procured by misrepresentation; therefore the judgment for the plaintiff was maintained and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Supreme Court of Alberta, Appellate Division, affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment of the court below affirmed.