Robert v. Montreal Trust Co.

Robert v. Montreal Trust Co.

Majority held appellant failed to prove he was actually induced by the alleged misrepresentations and, having acquiesced and delayed repudiation for a substantial period after knowledge, was precluded from rescinding; accordingly the defence of misrepresentation failed and the pledgee could enforce the underwriting for the amount due.

Citation
(1918) 56 SCR 342
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Edmund A. Robert; Respondent/plaintiff: The Montreal Trust Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 March 1918
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil Commercial/company) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Superior Court of Quebec (sitting in Review)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Superior Court affirmed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Estoppel, Acquiescence, Subscription for Shares, Repudiation, Laches, Underwriting, Pledge/hypothecation
Source Language
English
Commercial Law Company Law Contract Law Equity Misrepresentation Estoppel Acquiescence Subscription for Shares +4 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edmund A. Robert

Appellant/defendant

The Montreal Trust Company

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil Commercial/company) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Superior Court of Quebec (sitting in Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether misrepresentations by the promoter induced the subscription for shares
  2. 2 Whether delay, silence or laches by the subscriber bars rescission and operates as acquiescence or estoppel
  3. 3 Whether the heading "to be issued" in an underwriting implies a condition limiting subscriber liability until stated capital is issued

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held appellant failed to prove he was actually induced by the alleged misrepresentations and, having acquiesced and delayed repudiation for a substantial period after knowledge, was precluded from rescinding; accordingly the defence of misrepresentation failed and the pledgee could enforce the underwriting for the amount due.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Superior Court affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of the Superior Court of Quebec (sitting in review) affirmed; action maintained with costs