Rattray v. Larue

Rattray v. Larue

A tutor ad hoc cannot be appointed to represent minors who have no general tutor; art.269 C.C. confines tutor ad hoc to cases where a general tutor exists and there is a conflict with that tutor. The proper procedure to protect beneficiaries of a substitution is to appoint first a tutor to persons and property where necessary and, for representation of called beneficiaries, a curator to the substitution under art.945 C.C.; accordingly the intervention by the respondent as tutor ad hoc was unauthorized and the appeal is allowed.

Citation
(1887) 15 SCR 102
Parties
Appellant (trustee): David Rattray; Respondent (tuteur Ad Hoc): W. E. Larue
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 May 1887
Procedural Posture
Appeal Trust/accounting and Removal From Trusteeship / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal Side)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Tutor Ad Hoc, Intervention, Substitution, Curator to Substitution, Appointment of Tutor, Minor Representation
Source Language
English
Trusts Civil Procedure Family Law (minor Guardianship) Agency Tutor Ad Hoc Intervention Substitution Curator to Substitution +2 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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Rattray

Appellant (trustee)

W. E. Larue

Respondent (tuteur Ad Hoc)

Procedural Posture

Appeal Trust/accounting and Removal From Trusteeship / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal Side)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a tutor ad hoc can be validly appointed for minors who have no existing tutor
  2. 2 Whether a tutor ad hoc so appointed has standing to intervene in a suit concerning the substitution
  3. 3 Whether the appointment of Larue was lawful and whether intervention was the appropriate procedural device

Ratio Decidendi

A tutor ad hoc cannot be appointed to represent minors who have no general tutor; art.269 C.C. confines tutor ad hoc to cases where a general tutor exists and there is a conflict with that tutor. The proper procedure to protect beneficiaries of a substitution is to appoint first a tutor to persons and property where necessary and, for representation of called beneficiaries, a curator to the substitution under art.945 C.C.; accordingly the intervention by the respondent as tutor ad hoc was unauthorized and the appeal is allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Costs awarded against the respondent personally