Smith v. Shanklin
Court headnote
Smith v. Shanklin Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1933-04-25 Report [1933] SCR 340 Judges Duff, Lyman Poore; Rinfret, Thibaudeau; Lamont, John Henderson; Smith, Robert; Crocket, Oswald Smith On appeal from New Brunswick Subjects Property law Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Smith v. Shanklin, [1933] S.C.R. 340 Date: 1933-04-25. Smith v. Shanklin 1933: March 1; 1933: April 25. Present: Duff, Rinfret, Lamont, Smith and Crocket JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW BRUNSWICK Conveyance—Allegation of fraud in execution—Confidential relationship between the parties—Conveyance set aside—Lack of independent advice. APPEAL by the defendant from the judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick[1], dismissing the defendant’s appeal from the judgment of Baxter J.[2] in favour of the respondent plaintiff. The respondent, as executor of the late G. W. Shanklin and in his own right, brought an action to set aside a certain conveyance made by the said G. W. S. to the appellant, the grantee named in the conveyance. The action was tried before Mr. Justice Baxter who ordered the conveyance set aside, finding that the execution of the conveyance had been obtained by fraud and that, owing to the circumstances of the case, the late G. W. Shanklin should have had independent advice. The Appellate Division dismissed the defendant’s appeal from that judgment. On the appeal to the Court, after hearing argument of counsel, the…
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.scc-csc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
Smith v. Shanklin Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1933-04-25 Report [1933] SCR 340 Judges Duff, Lyman Poore; Rinfret, Thibaudeau; Lamont, John Henderson; Smith, Robert; Crocket, Oswald Smith On appeal from New Brunswick Subjects Property law Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Smith v. Shanklin, [1933] S.C.R. 340 Date: 1933-04-25. Smith v. Shanklin 1933: March 1; 1933: April 25. Present: Duff, Rinfret, Lamont, Smith and Crocket JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW BRUNSWICK Conveyance—Allegation of fraud in execution—Confidential relationship between the parties—Conveyance set aside—Lack of independent advice. APPEAL by the defendant from the judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick[1], dismissing the defendant’s appeal from the judgment of Baxter J.[2] in favour of the respondent plaintiff. The respondent, as executor of the late G. W. Shanklin and in his own right, brought an action to set aside a certain conveyance made by the said G. W. S. to the appellant, the grantee named in the conveyance. The action was tried before Mr. Justice Baxter who ordered the conveyance set aside, finding that the execution of the conveyance had been obtained by fraud and that, owing to the circumstances of the case, the late G. W. Shanklin should have had independent advice. The Appellate Division dismissed the defendant’s appeal from that judgment. On the appeal to the Court, after hearing argument of counsel, the Court reserved judgment; and, on a subsequent day, delivered judgment dismissing the appeal with costs. Written reasons were delivered by Lamont J. for the court, in which the learned judge, after making a complete review of all the facts of the case, concluded i n saying that "under these circumstanced and in view of the evidence, it cannot be said that the Appellate Division was wrong in affirming the judgment of the trial judge." Appeal dismissed with costs. P.J. Hughes K.C. for the appellant. D.King Hazen for the respondent. [1] (1932) 5 M.P.R. 204. [2] (1932) 5 M.P.R. 205.
Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca
Démocratie en surveillance c. Canada (Procureur général)
2024 CAF 75