Cumming v. Land Banking and Loan Company

Cumming v. Land Banking and Loan Company

Wragg, though an executor, acted as trustee when he took and assigned mortgages in his own name described as trustee; that description constituted constructive notice to assignees and put them on inquiry; because the breach related to dealing with the securities themselves the assignees could not claim protection as innocent purchasers; consequently the transfers were invalid as against the beneficiaries and the purchasers must account.

Citation
(1893) 22 SCR 246
Parties
Appellants / Plaintiffs: Thomas Cumming and Others; Respondents / Defendants: The Landed Banking and Loan Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 June 1893
Procedural Posture
Appeal (trust Dispute) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Chancellor and Queen's Bench affirmed; judgment of Court of Appeal reversed
Legal Topics
Breach of Trust, Constructive Notice, Executors and Trustees, Burden of Proof, Transfer of Securities
Source Language
English
Trusts Equity Property Civil Procedure Breach of Trust Constructive Notice Executors and Trustees Burden of Proof +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Cumming and Others

Appellants / Plaintiffs

The Landed Banking and Loan Company

Respondents / Defendants

Procedural Posture

Appeal (trust Dispute) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Wragg acted as trustee or as executor when taking and assigning mortgages
  2. 2 Whether the assignees had constructive notice of the trust and were put on inquiry by the instruments' form
  3. 3 Whether assignees are protected as purchasers for value without notice where the breach relates to dealing with the securities themselves

Ratio Decidendi

Wragg, though an executor, acted as trustee when he took and assigned mortgages in his own name described as trustee; that description constituted constructive notice to assignees and put them on inquiry; because the breach related to dealing with the securities themselves the assignees could not claim protection as innocent purchasers; consequently the transfers were invalid as against the beneficiaries and the purchasers must account.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Chancellor and Queen's Bench affirmed; judgment of Court of Appeal reversed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs
  • Judgment of the Chancellor affirmed