Taylor v. Robertson

Taylor v. Robertson

Appeal allowed: the appellant solicitor was not liable to indemnify the sheriff either in tort or by implied indemnity where he acted as known agent following the then-established jurisprudence; neither solicitor nor sheriff were tortfeasors for registering the execution against lands registered in the judgment debtor's name; no express indemnity proved; appellant entitled to judgment on his counterclaim for reasonable costs to be taxed.

Citation
(1901) 31 SCR 615
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Sidney Stockton Taylor; Respondent / Plaintiff: Walter Scott Robertson
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 November 1901
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal: Professional Negligence / Indemnity / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Appellate)
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; judgment for defendant (appellant Taylor) on his first counterclaim for taxed costs; cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Indemnity, Registration of Land and Priority of Unregistered Transfers, Sheriff Duties and Execution Levy, Interpleader, Counterclaim and Bill of Costs, Solicitor Liability
Source Language
English
Professional Negligence Property Law Civil Procedure Agency Law Tort Law Indemnity Registration of Land and Priority of Unregistered Transfers Sheriff Duties and Execution Levy +3 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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sidney Stockton Taylor

Appellant / Defendant

Walter Scott Robertson

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal: Professional Negligence / Indemnity / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Appellate)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a solicitor is liable to indemnify a sheriff for costs arising from an irregular levy under a writ of execution
  2. 2 Whether a solicitor giving advice based on existing court jurisprudence is guilty of actionable negligence if that jurisprudence is later overruled
  3. 3 Whether a sheriff or solicitor is a tortfeasor by registering an execution against lands when subsequent prior unregistered transfers are later registered

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal allowed: the appellant solicitor was not liable to indemnify the sheriff either in tort or by implied indemnity where he acted as known agent following the then-established jurisprudence; neither solicitor nor sheriff were tortfeasors for registering the execution against lands registered in the judgment debtor's name; no express indemnity proved; appellant entitled to judgment on his counterclaim for reasonable costs to be taxed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; judgment for defendant (appellant Taylor) on his first counterclaim for taxed costs; cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs in all courts; judgment entered for the defendant on his first counterclaim for such amount as the proper officer may tax the costs.