Gold v. Reinblatt

Gold v. Reinblatt

The Court accepted that foreign law is a question of fact and that the witness (Doctor Oxorn), by his education, prior practice and citation of the Austrian Code, was competent to prove Austrian law; because the pleadings confined the dispute to Austrian law the defendant could not raise an unpleaded Russian domicile defence at trial; therefore there was no community and the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[1929] SCR 74
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Hyman Gold; Respondent / Plaintiff: B. L. Reinblatt; Mis En Cause: Isaac Kert
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 December 1928
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of King’s Bench, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Court of King’s Bench affirmed.
Legal Topics
Proof of Foreign Law, Competency of Witnesses, Pleadings and Surprise, Domicile, Community Property
Source Language
English
Evidence Conflict of Laws Family Law Property Law Proof of Foreign Law Competency of Witnesses Pleadings and Surprise Domicile +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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hyman Gold

Appellant / Defendant

B. L. Reinblatt

Respondent / Plaintiff

Isaac Kert

Mis En Cause

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a witness not actually practising in the foreign country is competent to prove that country’s law
  2. 2 Whether Austrian law governed the parties’ matrimonial regime
  3. 3 Whether the defendant could raise a Russian domicile defence not pleaded and thus amounting to surprise

Ratio Decidendi

The Court accepted that foreign law is a question of fact and that the witness (Doctor Oxorn), by his education, prior practice and citation of the Austrian Code, was competent to prove Austrian law; because the pleadings confined the dispute to Austrian law the defendant could not raise an unpleaded Russian domicile defence at trial; therefore there was no community and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Court of King’s Bench affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of Court of King’s Bench, Appeal Side, Province of Quebec affirmed