Johnston v. Buckland

Johnston v. Buckland

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal because the trial judge properly found a sufficient commencement of proof in writing (Exhibit D2 and respondent's admissions under art.316 C.C.P.) to admit oral evidence proving the alleged verbal agreement to consolidate accounts; the agreement was proven; the agreement did not qualify as a commercial matter under art.1233(1) but the commencement of proof exception applied; the question whether the daughter's transactions were null for lack of marital authorization could not be finally determined without impleading the daughter and was remitted to the Superior Court for that sole issue.

Citation
[1937] SCR 86
Parties
Appellants / Defendants: Stanley Johnston and Others; Respondent / Plaintiff: Dame Winnifred Buckland
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 February 1937
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (broker Client / Securities) / On Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King’s Bench, Province of Quebec (appeal Side)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Court of King’s Bench reversed; Superior Court judgment restored except as to the marital-authorization issue; case remitted to Superior Court for sole determination of nullity question if respondent impleads Dame V. C. Webster within one month; costs awarded to appellants
Legal Topics
Marginal Trading, Commencement of Proof in Writing, Oral Evidence Admissibility, Commercial Matters Under Art 1233 C.c., Broker Client Account Consolidation, Marital Authorization and Nullity of Transactions
Source Language
English
Securities Evidence Civil Procedure Contract Family Law (marital Authorization) Marginal Trading Commencement of Proof in Writing Oral Evidence Admissibility +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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanley Johnston and Others

Appellants / Defendants

Dame Winnifred Buckland

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (broker Client / Securities) / On Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King’s Bench, Province of Quebec (appeal Side)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an alleged verbal agreement to consolidate mother and daughters' brokerage accounts and charge daughter balances to mother could be proven orally
  2. 2 Whether the transactions fell within "commercial matters" under article 1233(1) C.C. allowing oral proof
  3. 3 Whether there was a sufficient commencement of proof in writing under article 1233(7) C.C. (and art. 316 C.C.P.) to admit oral evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal because the trial judge properly found a sufficient commencement of proof in writing (Exhibit D2 and respondent's admissions under art.316 C.C.P.) to admit oral evidence proving the alleged verbal agreement to consolidate accounts; the agreement was proven; the agreement did not qualify as a commercial matter under art.1233(1) but the commencement of proof exception applied; the question whether the daughter's transactions were null for lack of marital authorization could not be finally determined without impleading the daughter and was remitted to the Superior Court for that sole issue.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Court of King’s Bench reversed; Superior Court judgment restored except as to the marital-authorization issue; case remitted to Superior Court for sole determination of nullity question if respondent impleads Dame V. C. Webster within one month; costs awarded to appellants

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs throughout
  • Judgment of the Court of King’s Bench (appeal side) is reversed and set aside