In re O'Brien

In re O'Brien

The appeal is allowed: the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear appeals from provincial final judgments adjudging constructive contempt; the relator lacked locus standi because the underlying quo warranto litigation had been finally terminated by abandonment of the appeal prior to the motion so the publication could not prejudice any pending proceedings; and an adjudication of contempt coupled with an order to pay costs is appealable as it effectively imposes punishment.

Citation
(1889) 16 SCR 197
Parties
Appellant (solicitor): Henry O'Brien; Respondent (relator): The Queen upon the Relation of Frederic Felitz; Defendant (candidate): William H. Howland
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 March 1889
Procedural Posture
Appeal in Contempt Proceeding Arising From Quo Warranto / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario (final)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Constructive Contempt, Locus Standi, Appealability of Contempt Adjudications, Publication and Prejudice to Pending Litigation, Costs as Punitive Measure
Source Language
English
Contempt of Court Civil Procedure Appellate Jurisdiction Constructive Contempt Locus Standi Appealability of Contempt Adjudications Publication and Prejudice to Pending Litigation Costs as Punitive Measure

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Henry O'Brien

Appellant (solicitor)

The Queen upon the Relation of Frederic Felitz

Respondent (relator)

William H. Howland

Defendant (candidate)

Procedural Posture

Appeal in Contempt Proceeding Arising From Quo Warranto / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Supreme Court have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a provincial court adjudication of constructive contempt?
  2. 2 Was the publication by the appellant a constructive contempt prejudicing pending litigation?
  3. 3 Did the relator have locus standi to move to commit when the appeal had been abandoned?

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed: the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear appeals from provincial final judgments adjudging constructive contempt; the relator lacked locus standi because the underlying quo warranto litigation had been finally terminated by abandonment of the appeal prior to the motion so the publication could not prejudice any pending proceedings; and an adjudication of contempt coupled with an order to pay costs is appealable as it effectively imposes punishment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the Chancery Divisional Court and Court of Appeal set aside
  • Motion to commit Henry O'Brien discharged and refusal of committal ordered