Kirkpatrick v. Birks

Kirkpatrick v. Birks

The application for approval of the security bond was refused because the underlying order was interlocutory and did not affect the rights of the parties; therefore leave to appeal and approval of the bond should not be granted.

Citation
(1905) 37 SCR 512
Parties
Appellant: Ellen Kirkpatrick; Respondents: Egbert Morris Birks and others
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 November 1905
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Approval of Security Bond on Appeal (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application refused with costs
Legal Topics
Security on Appeal, Interlocutory Order, Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Succession Law Appeal Security on Appeal Interlocutory Order Jurisdiction

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ellen Kirkpatrick

Appellant

Egbert Morris Birks and others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Approval of Security Bond on Appeal (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interlocutory order requiring a beneficiary to provide security under article 663 is appealable to the Supreme Court of Canada
  2. 2 Whether leave should be given to appeal an interlocutory order approving security bond
  3. 3 Whether approval of security can affect the parties' rights

Ratio Decidendi

The application for approval of the security bond was refused because the underlying order was interlocutory and did not affect the rights of the parties; therefore leave to appeal and approval of the bond should not be granted.

Court Disposition

Application refused with costs

Orders

  • Application for approval of security bond refused
  • Costs awarded to respondents