Walmsley v. Griffith

Walmsley v. Griffith

Where no substantial question remained to be settled before entry of the Court of Appeal's judgment, the thirty-day period for appeal under s.25 began to run from the pronouncing of the judgment; accordingly this appeal was not brought within the statutory time and must be dismissed.

Citation
(1886) 13 SCR 434
Parties
Appellant: Thomas Walmsley; Respondent: Kate Griffith; Respondent: Carrie L. Griffith; Respondent: George Wright; Respondent: Philip J. Slater; Respondent: J Hornbrook; Respondent: W. J. McCormack; Respondent: John Donogh; Respondent: William Badenach; Respondent: Walter H. Blight; Respondent: Robert Dodds; Respondent: A. G. Allison
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 April 1886
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Delay (timeliness of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Time for Appealing, Specific Performance, Security for Costs, Statutory Interpretation of Supreme and Exchequer Court Act S.25
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Equity Contract Appeal Time for Appealing Specific Performance Security for Costs Statutory Interpretation of Supreme and Exchequer Court Act S.25

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Walmsley

Appellant

Kate Griffith

Respondent

Carrie L. Griffith

Respondent

George Wright

Respondent

Philip J. Slater

Respondent

J Hornbrook

Respondent

W. J. McCormack

Respondent

John Donogh

Respondent

William Badenach

Respondent

Walter H. Blight

Respondent

Robert Dodds

Respondent

A. G. Allison

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Delay (timeliness of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the period for perfecting an appeal under s.25 begins on pronouncement of the Court of Appeal's judgment or on entry/settlement of the certificate of judgment
  2. 2 Whether substantial matters remained to be settled before entry of judgment so as to delay commencement of the appeal period
  3. 3 Whether a Supreme Court judge should disturb a lower judge's refusal to extend time for appealing

Ratio Decidendi

Where no substantial question remained to be settled before entry of the Court of Appeal's judgment, the thirty-day period for appeal under s.25 began to run from the pronouncing of the judgment; accordingly this appeal was not brought within the statutory time and must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Motion granted and appeal dismissed with costs