McDonald v. McPherson

McDonald v. McPherson

The carrier/agent had no independent right to retain the goods: the goods were forwarded to be delivered to the consignee and his assigns, and even if strict legal title did not pass to the plaintiff, the plaintiff held an equitable interest/right to possession sufficient to prevent the defendant (a wrongdoer) from withholding the goods; accordingly the verdict for the plaintiff in replevin was affirmed and the appeal dismissed with costs.

Citation
(1886) 12 SCR 416
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Roderick McDonald; Respondent/plaintiff: David McPherson
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 May 1886
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (replevin) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Bill of Lading, Assignment of Goods, Stoppage in Transitu, Replevin, Equitable Lien, Carrier Liability, Statute of Frauds, Judicature Act
Source Language
English
Transportation Property Commercial Law Agency Equity Bill of Lading Assignment of Goods Stoppage in Transitu +5 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roderick McDonald

Appellant/defendant

David McPherson

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (replevin) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether endorsement/assignment of a bill of lading transferred legal title to the assignee
  2. 2 Whether the carrier/agent at Pictou or Halifax had a right to withhold delivery on shipper's instruction
  3. 3 Whether an equitable interest in the goods was sufficient to sustain replevin after the Judicature Act

Ratio Decidendi

The carrier/agent had no independent right to retain the goods: the goods were forwarded to be delivered to the consignee and his assigns, and even if strict legal title did not pass to the plaintiff, the plaintiff held an equitable interest/right to possession sufficient to prevent the defendant (a wrongdoer) from withholding the goods; accordingly the verdict for the plaintiff in replevin was affirmed and the appeal dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Verdict for plaintiff in replevin sustained