Monarque v. Banque Jacques-Cartier

Monarque v. Banque Jacques-Cartier

The vendor (Bank) was not obliged to defend or guarantee against troubles resulting from the subsequent lawful alteration by the municipal authority of the street line; consequently the action in warranty against the Bank must be dismissed and, once the warranty action is dismissed, the appellate court cannot decide the merits of the principal petitory action on the warrantor's appeal; appeal dismissed with costs.

Citation
(1901) 31 SCR 474
Parties
Appellant; Plaintiff in Warranty: Julie Monarque; Respondent; Vendor and Warrantor: La Banque Jacques‑Cartier; Plaintiff (petitory Action): Paula S. Gauthier
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 October 1901
Procedural Posture
Appeal; Petitory Action and Incidental Action in Warranty / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of Queen's Bench (quebec)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Title to Land, Legal Warranty, Description and Plan of Subdivision, Alteration of Street Line, Accession, Eviction, Intervention and Warranty Appeals, Jurisdiction of Appellate Court
Source Language
English
Property Law Obligations (warranty) Municipal Law Civil Procedure Title to Land Legal Warranty Description and Plan of Subdivision Alteration of Street Line +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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julie Monarque

Appellant; Plaintiff in Warranty

La Banque Jacques‑Cartier

Respondent; Vendor and Warrantor

Paula S. Gauthier

Plaintiff (petitory Action)

Procedural Posture

Appeal; Petitory Action and Incidental Action in Warranty / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of Queen's Bench (quebec)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a vendor who described land according to an existing plan and gave a legal warranty is liable for troubles resulting from a subsequent municipal alteration of a street line
  2. 2 Whether a warrantor who refused to defend in the court of first instance may take up the defence on appeal
  3. 3 Whether dismissal of the action in warranty ousts the appellate court of jurisdiction to determine the principal petitory action

Ratio Decidendi

The vendor (Bank) was not obliged to defend or guarantee against troubles resulting from the subsequent lawful alteration by the municipal authority of the street line; consequently the action in warranty against the Bank must be dismissed and, once the warranty action is dismissed, the appellate court cannot decide the merits of the principal petitory action on the warrantor's appeal; appeal dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.