Fraser v. Imperial Bank of Canada

Fraser v. Imperial Bank of Canada

The Court held that Fraser had established an equitable assignment of the contract proceeds and that the bank could not appropriate the moneys earned by Fraser where the bank had notice or by its conduct was estopped from asserting priority for advances made after that notice; accordingly the bank’s claim was limited and the appellant was entitled to the funds earned by him (the appeal was allowed and lower judgments reversed).

Citation
(1912) 47 SCR 313
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: W. H. Fraser; Defendant/respondent: Imperial Bank of Canada; Defendant/respondent: Canadian Pacific Railway Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 November 1912
Procedural Posture
Collection / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada (on Appeal From Manitoba)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgments below reversed; judgment for appellant Fraser against Imperial Bank of Canada
Legal Topics
Assignment of Choses in Action, Priority of Competing Security Interests, Notice to Debtor, Equitable Estoppel, Construction of Statutory Assignment Provisions
Source Language
English
Banking Equity Contract Assignment of Choses in Action Priority of Competing Security Interests Notice to Debtor Equitable Estoppel Construction of Statutory Assignment Provisions

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W. H. Fraser

Plaintiff/appellant

Imperial Bank of Canada

Defendant/respondent

Canadian Pacific Railway Company

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Collection / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada (on Appeal From Manitoba)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the verbal arrangement between Garson and Fraser constituted an equitable assignment of moneys to arise under the contract
  2. 2 Whether the bank’s assignment and notice to the debtor gave it priority over Fraser
  3. 3 Whether the bank had notice or was estopped from asserting priority for advances made after notice

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that Fraser had established an equitable assignment of the contract proceeds and that the bank could not appropriate the moneys earned by Fraser where the bank had notice or by its conduct was estopped from asserting priority for advances made after that notice; accordingly the bank’s claim was limited and the appellant was entitled to the funds earned by him (the appeal was allowed and lower judgments reversed).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgments below reversed; judgment for appellant Fraser against Imperial Bank of Canada

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and judgments of trial court and Court of Appeal reversed
  • Judgment entered for plaintiff W. H. Fraser for $7,830 with interest at the statutory rate from date of receipt