Coté v. The James Richardson Co.

Coté v. The James Richardson Co.

The majority held that an intervention filed under the Quebec Code is a "judicial proceeding" for purposes of s.29 of the Supreme and Exchequer Courts Act and that the matter in controversy for appellate jurisdiction is the value of the subject-matter of the intervention (here the seized wood, alleged over $4,000); accordingly the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal from the judgment on the intervention. This principle controls whether the appeal is competent irrespective of the smaller sum claimed in the original action.

Citation
(1906) 38 SCR 41
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Emile Coté; Respondent / Intervening Party: The James Richardson Company, Limited; Defendant (original): Dionne
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 November 1906
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (motion to Quash for Want of Jurisdiction; Merits Heard; Decision on Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed without costs (motion to quash earlier dismissed with costs; on merits the Court was equally divided leading to dismissal)
Legal Topics
Intervention, Amount in Controversy, Saisie Arrêt (attachment Before Judgment), Ownership of Seized Property, Jurisdictional Threshold
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Appeal Jurisdiction Property Dispute Intervention Amount in Controversy Saisie Arrêt (attachment Before Judgment) Ownership of Seized Property Jurisdictional Threshold

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

Parties

Emile Coté

Appellant / Plaintiff

The James Richardson Company, Limited

Respondent / Intervening Party

Dionne

Defendant (original)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (motion to Quash for Want of Jurisdiction; Merits Heard; Decision on Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an intervention under the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure is a "judicial proceeding" within s.29 of the Supreme and Exchequer Courts Act
  2. 2 Whether the amount in controversy for appellate jurisdiction is measured by the intervention (value of the thing claimed) rather than the amount demanded in the original action
  3. 3 Whether an intervention raises a separate actionable issue that can support an appeal independently of the principal demand

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that an intervention filed under the Quebec Code is a "judicial proceeding" for purposes of s.29 of the Supreme and Exchequer Courts Act and that the matter in controversy for appellate jurisdiction is the value of the subject-matter of the intervention (here the seized wood, alleged over $4,000); accordingly the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal from the judgment on the intervention. This principle controls whether the appeal is competent irrespective of the smaller sum claimed in the original action.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed without costs (motion to quash earlier dismissed with costs; on merits the Court was equally divided leading to dismissal)

Orders

  • Motion to quash appeal dismissed with costs
  • Appeal dismissed without costs