Lamy v. Rouleau

Lamy v. Rouleau

Citation
[1927] SCR 288
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Alphonse Lamy; Respondent / Plaintiff: Dame Albina Rouleau
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 February 1927
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of King’s Bench, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of the Court of King’s Bench reversed; matter remitted to the trial court to determine the distribution of the initial adjudication proceeds and whether the respondent's claim would have been fully collocated; if so, dismiss action, if not, maintain action to extent of any shortfall.
Legal Topics
Sheriff's Sale, Resale for False Bidding, Transfer/cession of Debt, Guarantee De Fournir Et Faire Valoir (suretyship), Service/signification of Transfer, Extinction of Debt, Adjudication and Purchaser Liability, Subrogation, Distribution of Sale Proceeds
Source Language
English
Property Law Contract Civil Procedure Suretyship Execution of Judgments Credit and Security Sheriff's Sale Resale for False Bidding +7 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alphonse Lamy

Appellant / Defendant

Dame Albina Rouleau

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of King’s Bench, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether guarantee de fournir et faire valoir in a transfer is a suretyship giving rise to action de recours against the transferor
  2. 2 Whether a transfer of debt binds the debtor before service (signification) or acceptance by the debtor
  3. 3 Whether adjudication at a sheriff’s sale and subsequent resales for false bidding extinguish the cedant's or transferee's recourse against the guarantor

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of the Court of King’s Bench reversed; matter remitted to the trial court to determine the distribution of the initial adjudication proceeds and whether the respondent's claim would have been fully collocated; if so, dismiss action, if not, maintain action to extent of any shortfall.

Orders

  • Judgment of the Court of King’s Bench reversed
  • Record remitted to the Superior Court to determine what the judgment of distribution would have been following Chauret's $34,000 adjudication