Stewart v. Hanover Fire Insurance Co.

Stewart v. Hanover Fire Insurance Co.

Tacit renewal under Civil Code art.1667 is to be interpreted like tacit renewal for leases of things (art.1609): it prolongs a one‑year hire of personal services for another year and requires notice to terminate within the delay required by law; the length of that notice is governed by art.1657 (three months where remuneration or significant part thereof is payable at terms of three months or more), and on these facts the respondent's notice was insufficient, entitling the appellant to damages.

Citation
[1936] SCR 177
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Alexander M. Stewart; Respondent/defendant: Hanover Fire Insurance Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 April 1936
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (wrongful Dismissal/contract) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Quebec
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the Superior Court restored.
Legal Topics
Tacit Renewal, Notice Period for Termination, Lease and Hire of Personal Services, Interpretation of Civil Code Arts.1608 1670, Damages for Wrongful Dismissal
Source Language
English
Contract Law Employment Law Property/lease Law Civil Code Interpretation Tacit Renewal Notice Period for Termination Lease and Hire of Personal Services Interpretation of Civil Code Arts.1608 1670 +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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander M. Stewart

Appellant/plaintiff

Hanover Fire Insurance Company

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (wrongful Dismissal/contract) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether tacit renewal of a lease/hire of personal services prolongs the contract for another year
  2. 2 Whether notice given Oct 21, 1932 was sufficient to terminate a tacitly renewed annual contract ending Dec 1, 1932
  3. 3 Whether frequency of salary payment affects length of notice required

Ratio Decidendi

Tacit renewal under Civil Code art.1667 is to be interpreted like tacit renewal for leases of things (art.1609): it prolongs a one‑year hire of personal services for another year and requires notice to terminate within the delay required by law; the length of that notice is governed by art.1657 (three months where remuneration or significant part thereof is payable at terms of three months or more), and on these facts the respondent's notice was insufficient, entitling the appellant to damages.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the Superior Court restored.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and judgment of the Superior Court restored
  • Award damages to appellant in the amount of $5,312.50 CAD