Supreme Court of Canada
Clement v. La Banque Nationale, (1903) 33 SCR 343
Date: 1903-05-06
ARTHUR ISIDORE CLEMENT (DEFENDANT)
Appellant;
And
LA BANQUENATIONALE (PLAINTIFF)
Respondent.
FRANÇOIS-XA VIER BILODEAU
Mis En Cause
1903: May 5; 1903: May 6
PRESENT : Sir Elzéar Taschereau C.J. and Sedgewick Girouard Davies and MíIIs JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH, APPEAL SIDE, PROVINCE OF QUEBEC.
Appeal—Jurisdiction—Amount in controversy—Secretion of estate by insolvent —Contrainte per corps—Arts. 885, 888 C. P. Q.
On a contestation of a statement of an insolvent trader by a creditor claiming a sum exceeding $2,000, the judgment appealed from condemned the appellant, under the provisions of art. 888 C. P. Q., to three months' imprisonment for secretion of a portion of his insolvent estate, to the value of at least $6,000.
Held, that there was no pecuniary amount in controversy and there could be no appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.
MOTION to quash an appeal from the judgment of the Court of King's Bench, appeal side, affirming the judgment of the Superior Court, District of Montreal, by which the appellant was condemned to three months imprisonment in the common gaol under the provisions of the 885th and 888th articles of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Province of Quebec for want of jurisdiction.
Belcourt K.C. for the motion.
Mignault K.C. contra.
The judgment of the court was delivered by :
[Page 344]
THE CHIEF JUSTICE.—This case comes up on a motion to quash the appeal.
By a judgment of the Court of King's Bench, affirming a judgment of the Superior Court, the appellant, who had made a judicial abandonment for the benefit of his creditors, was found guilty of having, in his statement filed in court, secreted a portion of his property, to the value of at least $6,000, within the year preceeding his abandonment and statement, under art. 885 subsec. 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and he was condemned, under art. 888 of that Code, to three months' imprisonment He appeals from that judgment and rests his right to appeal exclusively upon the ground that the matter in controversy amounts to $2,000.
Now there is clearly no amount in controversy here» There is no condemnation for any pecuniary amount against the appellant. Under subsection one of said article 885, the judgment would have been the same irrespective of the pecuniary amount, provided it amounted to at least one hundred dollars and under subsection 3, no amount is fixed. Any secretion of property, within the year preceding, however small the amount of it renders the debtor liable to the penalty provided for in article 885 sub-sec. 3 and article 888 C P. Q.
Motion to quash allowed with costs and appeal quashed with costs.
Appeal quashed with costs.
Solicitors for the appellant : Desbois & Dion.
Solicitors for the respondent : Laurendeau & Bazin.
Email this Content