Généreux v. Bruneau

Généreux v. Bruneau

The Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction because the challenged order was interlocutory (an order to take accounts) and the amount in controversy did not meet the $2,000 threshold; accordingly the appeal was quashed.

Citation
(1910) 47 SCR 400
Parties
Appellants: Généreux et al.; Respondents: Bruneau et al.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 December 1910
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Court of King's Bench, Quebec; Motion to Quash for Want of Jurisdiction Heard and Renewed at Hearing of the Appeal
Outcome
Appeal quashed for want of jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Will, Executors' Powers, Interlocutory Judgment, Amount in Controversy, Costs
Source Language
English
Estates Civil Procedure Appeal Jurisdiction Will Executors' Powers Interlocutory Judgment Amount in Controversy Costs

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Généreux et al.

Appellants

Bruneau et al.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Court of King's Bench, Quebec; Motion to Quash for Want of Jurisdiction Heard and Renewed at Hearing of the Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from an order to take accounts
  2. 2 Whether the judgment appealed from was interlocutory and therefore not appealable
  3. 3 Whether the amount in controversy met the statutory threshold of $2,000

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction because the challenged order was interlocutory (an order to take accounts) and the amount in controversy did not meet the $2,000 threshold; accordingly the appeal was quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal quashed for want of jurisdiction

Orders

  • Appeal quashed with costs to be taxed as if the appeal had been dismissed on the merits.