Price v. LeBlond

Price v. LeBlond

The instrument was an ordinary fixed-term lease that hypothecated improvements but did not create emphyteutic or perpetual rights equivalent to a sale; therefore the lessee could not convey proprietary rights by the 1885 deed and the transferee had no title to maintain a petitory action. The petitory claim was properly dismissed and the possessory claim was insufficiently proved; the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
(1900) 30 SCR 539
Parties
Appellants/plaintiffs: William Price and Amos Colston, executors of the late Evan John Price; Respondent/defendant: Cirice LeBlond
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 October 1900
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Superior Court (sitting in Review) at Quebec
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of Superior Court affirmed
Legal Topics
Emphyteusis, Bail À Rente, Lease for Rent, Petitory Action, Possessory Action, Transfer of Lease, Hypothecation of Improvements, Prescription, Cumulative Pleading
Source Language
English
Property Lease Civil Procedure Real Rights Emphyteusis Bail À Rente Lease for Rent Petitory Action +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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Price and Amos Colston, executors of the late Evan John Price

Appellants/plaintiffs

Cirice LeBlond

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Superior Court (sitting in Review) at Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original instrument created an emphyteusis or bail à rente equivalent to a conveyance of ownership
  2. 2 Whether a transferee under a deed of sale from the lessee could bring a petitory action in his own name
  3. 3 Whether the lessee could transfer proprietary rights he did not possess

Ratio Decidendi

The instrument was an ordinary fixed-term lease that hypothecated improvements but did not create emphyteutic or perpetual rights equivalent to a sale; therefore the lessee could not convey proprietary rights by the 1885 deed and the transferee had no title to maintain a petitory action. The petitory claim was properly dismissed and the possessory claim was insufficiently proved; the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of Superior Court affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of the Superior Court, District of Kamouraska, affirmed