Ricard v. Grand'Mère

Ricard v. Grand'Mère

The initial ten‑year contract had expired and the municipality lawfully exercised newly vested statutory powers to supply electric lighting; there was no contractual obligation preventing that exercise and therefore no enforceable right of renewal, and the provincial statute validating the by‑laws confirmed their...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
(1914) 50 SCR 122
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: J. O. Honorius Ricard; Respondent / Defendant: La Ville De Grand’mère
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 June 1914
Procedural Posture
Contract Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; cross-appeal allowed in part without costs.
Legal Topics
Exclusive Franchise, Contract Renewal, Pacte De Préférence, Municipal by Law Validation, Legislative Ratification
Source Language
english
Contract Municipal Law Public Law Exclusive Franchise Contract Renewal Pacte De Préférence Municipal by Law Validation Legislative Ratification

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J. O. Honorius Ricard

Appellant / Plaintiff

La Ville De Grand’mère

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract created an enforceable right to a ten‑year renewal
  2. 2 Whether the municipality could lawfully exercise statutory powers to supply electric lighting and thereby refuse renewal
  3. 3 Effect of legislative validation of the by-law on the appellant's rights and standing as a ratepayer

Ratio Decidendi

The initial ten‑year contract had expired and the municipality lawfully exercised newly vested statutory powers to supply electric lighting; there was no contractual obligation preventing that exercise and therefore no enforceable right of renewal, and the provincial statute validating the by‑laws confirmed their validity.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; cross-appeal allowed in part without costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment modified to declare the municipal resolution of 28 August 1912 valid