Brown v. Trynor and Boyd, (1980) 37 N.S.R.(2d) 139 (CA)

• Judge: Coffin, Cooper and Jones, JJ.A.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: January 03, 1980
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1980), 37 N.S.R.(2d) 139 (CA)

Brown v. Trynor (1980), 37 N.S.R.(2d) 139 (CA);

    67 A.P.R. 139

MLB headnote and full text

Brown v. Trynor and Boyd

(S.C.A. No. 00542)

Indexed As: Brown v. Trynor and Boyd

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Appeal Division

Coffin, Cooper and Jones, JJ.A.

January 3, 1980.

Summary:

This case arose out of an action on a promissory note and an application for summary judgment pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 13. The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, dismissed the application for summary judgment and refused to strike out the defence. The defence alleged misrepresentation respecting the property transferred by the payee to the maker as consideration for the note. The Trial Division stated that the defence raised a fairly arguable defence. The judgment of the Trial Division is not reported in this series of reports. The plaintiff appealed to the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of the Trial Division.

Practice - Topic 5714

Summary judgments - On a promissory note - The payee of a promissory note applied for summary judgment on the note pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 13 - The defendant objected and alleged misrepresentation respecting the property transferred by the payee to the maker as consideration for the note - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of the application for summary judgment by the Trial Division - The Court of Appeal affirmed that the defendant raised a fairly arguable defence - The Court of Appeal canvassed the authorities respecting the defences that may be raised in an action on a promissory note.

Practice - Topic 5701

Summary judgments - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal referred to Civil Procedure Rule 13 and to the circumstances when a plaintiff may obtain summary judgment without trial (see paragraph 9).

Cases Noticed:

Carl B. Potter Ltd. v. Anil Canada Ltd. et al. (1976), 15 N.S.R.(2d) 408; 14 A.P.R. 408, refd to. [paras. 8, 74].

Lunenburg County Press Ltd. v. Deamond (1977), 18 N.S.R.(2d) 689; 20 A.P.R. 689, refd to. [paras. 10, 74].

James Lamont & Co. Ltd. v. Hyland Ltd., [1950] 1 K.B. 585, refd to. [paras. 16, 75].

Glennie v. Imri (1839), 3 Y. & C. 436; 160 E.R. 773, refd to. [para. 19].

Brown, Shipley and Co. Ltd. v. Alicia Hosiery Ltd., [1966] 1 Ld.R. 668, refd to. [paras. 21, 78].

Cebora S.N.C. v. S.I.P. (Industrial Products) Ltd., [1976] L1.R. 271, refd to. [para. 26].

Nova (Jersey) Knit Ltd. v. Kammgarn Spinnerei GmbH, [1977] 2 All E.R. 463, refd to. [paras. 28, 79].

Royal Bank of Canada v. Mendel, [1927] 6 W.W.R. 10, refd to. [para. 29].

Dawes v. Harness (1875), L.R. 10, C.P. 166, refd to. [para. 34].

Archer v. Bamford (1822), 3 Stark. 173; 171 E.R. 812, refd to. [para. 34].

Solomon v. Turner (1815), 1 Stark. 51; 171 E.R. 398, refd to. [para. 35].

Jade International Steel Stahl und Eisen GmbH & Co. KG v. Robert Nicholas (Steels) Ltd., [1978] 3 All E.R. 104, refd to. [para. 37].

Robinson and Cherry v. Reynolds (1841), Q.B. 196; 114 E.R. 77, refd to. [para. 44].

Thiedemann v. Goldschmidt et al. (1859), 1 De G.F. & J. 11; 45 E.R. 260, refd to. [para. 45].

Berlin v. Berlin (1957), 7 D.L.R.(2d) 625, refd to. [paras. 47, 81].

Fielding and Platt Ltd., v. Najjar, [1969] 2 All E.R. 150, refd to. [para. 48].

Barclays Bank Ltd. v. Aschaffenburger Zellstoffwerke A.G. (1967), 1 Lloyd's R. 387, refd to. [para. 49].

Marleigh Aluminum Products Ltd. v. Scott, [1960] O.W.N. 346, refd to. [para. 52].

Sleen et al. v. Auld, [1967] S.C.R. 88, refd to. [para. 54].

Stolberg Mill Construction Limited v. Selkirk Spruce Mills Limited (1957), 22 W.W.R. 605, refd to. [paras. 57, 83].

W.H. Malkin Ltd. v. Jackson (1963), 44 W.W.R. 63, refd to. [paras. 60, 82].

Aetna Insurance Company and Foster Wheeler Limited v. Mojan Ltee (defendant) and Fraser-Brace Engineering Company Limited (third party), 27 N.B.R.(2d) 356; 60 A.P.R. 356, refd to. [para. 63].

Anglo-Italian Bank v. Wells (1878), 38 L.T. 197, refd to. [para. 74].

Royal Bank of Canada v. Malouf (1932), 2 W.W.R. 526, refd to. [para. 74].

Morgan & Son v. Martin Johnson & Co. Ltd., [1949] 1 K.B. 107, refd to. [para. 77].

Royal Bank of Canada v. Mendel, [1977] 6 W.W.R. 10, dist. [para. 80].

Statutes Noticed:

Civil Procedure Rules (N.S.), rule 13, rule 14.25 [para. 7]; rule 38.02 [para. 61].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Byles on Bills of Exchange (23rd Ed.), p. 188 [para. 41].

Falconbridge on Banking and Bills of Exchange (7th Ed.), p. 665 [para. 53].

Annual Practice 1953, p. 194 [para. 57].

Annual Practice 1976, p. 142 [para. 78].

Counsel:

Jonathan C.K. Stobie, for the appellant;

Robin A. McDonald, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by COFFIN, COOPER and JONES, JJ.A, of the Appeal Division of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on October 17, 1979.

The judgment of the Appeal Division was delivered on January 3, 1980 and the following opinions were filed:

COFFIN, J.A. - see paragraphs 1 to 67;

COOPER, J.A. - see paragraphs 68 to 85.

JONES, J.A., concurred with COFFIN, J.A.