Robertson v. Quinlan

Robertson v. Quinlan

The trial judge erred in excluding parol evidence because the aggregate of writings and facts (endorsed share certificates, possession by appellant, the memorandum dictated by the testator, prior partnership agreement regarding survivors acquiring shares, and the June 20, 1927 letter) constituted a commencement of proof in writing under art. 1233(7) C.C., making the alleged assent probable; consequently testimonial evidence of the testator’s assent was admissible. The appeal is allowed in part and the matter is remitted for further inquiry and adjudication on the remaining issues.

Citation
[1934] SCR 550
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Angus William Robertson; Respondent (plaintiff): Ethel Quinlan; Defendant (testamentary Executor / Trustee): Capital Trust Corporation Ltd.; Respondent (intervenant): Margaret Quinlan; Intervenant (mis En Cause / Legatee): Dame Catherine Ryan
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 June 1934
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada Judgment on Appeal From Court of King’s Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; part of the Superior Court judgment and certain trial rulings quashed; oral evidence admitted; matter remitted to Superior Court for further enquiry and new adjudication on remaining issues between appellant Robertson and respondent Ethel Quinlan.
Legal Topics
Parol Evidence, Commencement of Proof in Writing, Capacity to Contract, Transfer of Shares, Executors' Powers, Res Judicata
Source Language
English
Evidence Succession Contract Trusts Parol Evidence Commencement of Proof in Writing Capacity to Contract Transfer of Shares +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angus William Robertson

Appellant (defendant)

Ethel Quinlan

Respondent (plaintiff)

Capital Trust Corporation Ltd.

Defendant (testamentary Executor / Trustee)

Margaret Quinlan

Respondent (intervenant)

Dame Catherine Ryan

Intervenant (mis En Cause / Legatee)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada Judgment on Appeal From Court of King’s Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether parol evidence is admissible to prove the deceased testator’s assent to a sale when there is a purported written agreement
  2. 2 Whether the facts and writings before the court constituted a commencement of proof in writing under art. 1233(7) C.C.
  3. 3 Whether the transfer of shares occurred before or after the testator’s death and thus whether the transfer was valid

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in excluding parol evidence because the aggregate of writings and facts (endorsed share certificates, possession by appellant, the memorandum dictated by the testator, prior partnership agreement regarding survivors acquiring shares, and the June 20, 1927 letter) constituted a commencement of proof in writing under art. 1233(7) C.C., making the alleged assent probable; consequently testimonial evidence of the testator’s assent was admissible. The appeal is allowed in part and the matter is remitted for further inquiry and adjudication on the remaining issues.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; part of the Superior Court judgment and certain trial rulings quashed; oral evidence admitted; matter remitted to Superior Court for further enquiry and new adjudication on remaining issues between appellant Robertson and respondent Ethel Quinlan.

Orders

  • Allow appeal with costs
  • Quash in part the judgment of the Superior Court and the trial rulings refusing oral evidence of facts and circumstances specified