Skip to main content
Supreme Court of Canada· 1917

Duplessis v. Edmonton Portland Cement Co.

(1917) 55 SCR 623
GeneralJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Duplessis v. Edmonton Portland Cement Co. Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1917-10-15 Report (1917) 55 SCR 623 Judges Fitzpatrick, Charles; Davies, Louis Henry; Idington, John; Duff, Lyman Poore; Anglin, Francis Alexander On appeal from Alberta Subjects Bills of exchange Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Duplessis v. Edmonton Portland Cement Co., (1917) 55 S.C.R. 623 Date: 1917-10-15 Duplessis; v. The Edmonton Portland Cement Company 1917: October 10, 15. Present:—Sir Charles Fitzpatrick C.J. and Davies, Idington, Duff and Anglin JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF ALBERTA. Bills and notes—Notice—Dual capacity — Promissory note.—Consideration. APPEAL from the judgment of the Supreme Court of Alberta, Appellate Division[1], affirming the judgment of Hyndman J. at the trial[2], and maintaining the respondent's (plaintiff's) action with costs. This action is on a promissory note given by the defendant (appellant) to the plaintiff (respondent). The appellant alleged misrepresentation and lack of consideration. The Supreme Court of Alberta held that the defendant had not discharged the burden upon him of proving that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course. On the appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, the court heard counsel for the appellant and, without calling upon counsel for the respondent, dismissed the appeal with costs. Appeal dismissed with costs. E. B. Edwards K.C. for the appellant. O. M. Biggar K.C. for the respondent. …

Read full judgment
Duplessis v. Edmonton Portland Cement Co.
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
1917-10-15
Report
(1917) 55 SCR 623
Judges
Fitzpatrick, Charles; Davies, Louis Henry; Idington, John; Duff, Lyman Poore; Anglin, Francis Alexander
On appeal from
Alberta
Subjects
Bills of exchange
Decision Content
Supreme Court of Canada
Duplessis v. Edmonton Portland Cement Co., (1917) 55 S.C.R. 623
Date: 1917-10-15
Duplessis;
v.
The Edmonton Portland Cement Company
1917: October 10, 15.
Present:—Sir Charles Fitzpatrick C.J. and Davies, Idington, Duff and Anglin JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF ALBERTA.
Bills and notes—Notice—Dual capacity — Promissory note.—Consideration. APPEAL from the judgment of the Supreme Court of Alberta, Appellate Division[1], affirming the judgment of Hyndman J. at the trial[2], and maintaining the respondent's (plaintiff's) action with costs.
This action is on a promissory note given by the defendant (appellant) to the plaintiff (respondent). The appellant alleged misrepresentation and lack of consideration. The Supreme Court of Alberta held that the defendant had not discharged the burden upon him of proving that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course.
On the appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, the court heard counsel for the appellant and, without calling upon counsel for the respondent, dismissed the appeal with costs.
Appeal dismissed with costs.
E. B. Edwards K.C. for the appellant.
O. M. Biggar K.C. for the respondent.
[1] 11 Alta. L.R. 58.
[2] 28 D.L.R. 748; 10 W.W.R. 514; 34 W.L.R. 250.

Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca

Related cases