Mathieu v. Mathieu
Court headnote
Mathieu v. Mathieu Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1926-05-04 Report [1926] SCR 598 Judges Anglin, Francis Alexander; Idington, John; Duff, Lyman Poore; Mignault, Pierre-Basile; Newcombe, Edmund Leslie; Rinfret, Thibaudeau On appeal from Quebec Subjects Bills of exchange Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Mathieu v. Mathieu, [1926] S.C.R. 598 Date: 1926-05-04 Mathieu v. Mathieu 1926: February 22; 1926: May 4. Present: Anglin C.J.C. and Idington, Duff, Mignault, Newcombe and Rinfret JJ. Account—Testamentary executor—Statement as to revenues—Art. 918 C.C.—Appeal—Jurisdiction—Costs APPEAL from the decision of the Court of King’s Bench, appeal side, province of Quebec[1], affirming the judgment of the trial judge, Mercier J., which maintained the respondent’s action. The appellant, as testamentary executor of the estate of one Urgel Mathieu, had been condemned by both courts to render an account to the respondent. Upon the appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada being called for hearing, the appellant’s counsel was heard merely on a question of jurisdiction raised by the court as to whether the sum of $2,000 was involved in the appeal. After hearing respondents counsel, the court declared that, as then constituted, the court would decline jurisdiction to hear the appeal; but as a matter of indulgence, the hearing of the appeal was postponed and appellant was given permission to ask special leave to appeal to this court from the appellate court. If the appellant failed…
Read full judgment
Mathieu v. Mathieu Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1926-05-04 Report [1926] SCR 598 Judges Anglin, Francis Alexander; Idington, John; Duff, Lyman Poore; Mignault, Pierre-Basile; Newcombe, Edmund Leslie; Rinfret, Thibaudeau On appeal from Quebec Subjects Bills of exchange Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Mathieu v. Mathieu, [1926] S.C.R. 598 Date: 1926-05-04 Mathieu v. Mathieu 1926: February 22; 1926: May 4. Present: Anglin C.J.C. and Idington, Duff, Mignault, Newcombe and Rinfret JJ. Account—Testamentary executor—Statement as to revenues—Art. 918 C.C.—Appeal—Jurisdiction—Costs APPEAL from the decision of the Court of King’s Bench, appeal side, province of Quebec[1], affirming the judgment of the trial judge, Mercier J., which maintained the respondent’s action. The appellant, as testamentary executor of the estate of one Urgel Mathieu, had been condemned by both courts to render an account to the respondent. Upon the appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada being called for hearing, the appellant’s counsel was heard merely on a question of jurisdiction raised by the court as to whether the sum of $2,000 was involved in the appeal. After hearing respondents counsel, the court declared that, as then constituted, the court would decline jurisdiction to hear the appeal; but as a matter of indulgence, the hearing of the appeal was postponed and appellant was given permission to ask special leave to appeal to this court from the appellate court. If the appellant failed to obtain same, the appeal should be further spoken to. In the meantime, the appeal should stand on the list. At a subsequent date, upon the respondent’s counsel moving to dispose of the costs of the appeal owing to the refusal of the appellate court to grant special leave to appeal, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered that the appeal be dismissed with the costs of a motion to quash, holding that the parties were equally in default in not having the question of the court’s jurisdiction determined at an early date: the appellant might have moved to affirm jurisdiction while the respondent might have moved to quash the appeal. Appeal dismissed. P. St. Germain K.C. for the appellant. C. Laurendeau K.C. and J. Desmarais K.C. for the respondent. [1] (1925) Q.R. 39 K.B. 235.
Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca