La Ville de Chateauguay v. Vigneault
The court refused special leave because the action was for $180 only and did not, on the facts before the court, involve rights in the future or an amount in controversy exceeding the statutory threshold; therefore the circumstances did not justify granting special leave to appeal.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1926] SCR 3
- Parties
- Appellant/defendant: La Ville de Chateauguay; Respondent/plaintiff: Dame Marie Vigneault
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 20 October 1925
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Motion for Special Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Motion dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Amount in Controversy, Future Rights, Debentures, Interest Coupons
- Source Language
- english
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
La Ville de Chateauguay
Appellant/defendant
Dame Marie Vigneault
Respondent/plaintiff
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion for Special Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether special leave to appeal should be granted
- 2 Whether the matter in controversy included future rights affecting the parties
- 3 Whether the amount in controversy exceeded the statutory threshold of $1,000
Ratio Decidendi
The court refused special leave because the action was for $180 only and did not, on the facts before the court, involve rights in the future or an amount in controversy exceeding the statutory threshold; therefore the circumstances did not justify granting special leave to appeal.
Court Disposition
Motion dismissed with costs
Orders
- Special leave to appeal denied
- Motion dismissed with costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment