D'Avignon v. Jones et al.

D'Avignon v. Jones et al.

Because two courts below unanimously found in favour of the respondents and the evidence was contradictory, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to disturb the concurrent findings of fact and dismissed the appeal with costs.

Citation
(1902) 32 SCR 650
Parties
Appellant: Joseph D'Avignon; Respondent: W. J. Jones; Respondent: J. J. Rutledge; Respondent: D. W. Davis
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 November 1902
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Concurrent Findings of Fact, Duty of Appellate Court, Setting Aside Conveyance, Forgery, Perjury
Source Language
English
Appeal Property Law Mining Law Forgery Fraud Concurrent Findings of Fact Duty of Appellate Court Setting Aside Conveyance +1 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph D'Avignon

Appellant

W. J. Jones

Respondent

J. J. Rutledge

Respondent

D. W. Davis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conveyance of the placer mineral claim was a forgery
  2. 2 Whether the appellate court should disturb concurrent findings of fact made by lower courts
  3. 3 Whether fraud, forgery and perjury were proven

Ratio Decidendi

Because two courts below unanimously found in favour of the respondents and the evidence was contradictory, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to disturb the concurrent findings of fact and dismissed the appeal with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.