J.P. Bickell & Co. v. Cutten

J.P. Bickell & Co. v. Cutten

Majority held there was no evidence of an express or implied agreement that accounts were to be settled in Canadian funds and no binding custom was proved; therefore the broker could not retain the exchange differential and the plaintiff was entitled to be credited in Canadian equivalent of New York funds according to the exchange rate on dates of receipt; the Appellate Division judgment in favour of the plaintiff was affirmed.

Citation
[1926] SCR 340
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: J.P. Bickell & Company; Respondent / Plaintiff: Lionel Forbes Cutten
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 December 1925
Procedural Posture
Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada / On Appeal From the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario affirmed (two judges dissenting)
Legal Topics
Broker Client Relationship, Exchange Rate Conversion, Accounting for Profits, Implied Agreement, Custom and Notice
Source Language
English
Agency Commercial/contract Equity Broker Client Relationship Exchange Rate Conversion Accounting for Profits Implied Agreement Custom and Notice

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J.P. Bickell & Company

Appellant / Defendant

Lionel Forbes Cutten

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada / On Appeal From the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff was entitled to be credited in New York funds equivalent for sums received by brokers' New York correspondents
  2. 2 Whether an implied or tacit agreement existed that all accounts between broker and client were to be settled in Canadian funds
  3. 3 Whether an arrangement between broker and its foreign correspondents, unknown to client, could permit broker to retain exchange profits

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held there was no evidence of an express or implied agreement that accounts were to be settled in Canadian funds and no binding custom was proved; therefore the broker could not retain the exchange differential and the plaintiff was entitled to be credited in Canadian equivalent of New York funds according to the exchange rate on dates of receipt; the Appellate Division judgment in favour of the plaintiff was affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario affirmed (two judges dissenting)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs