The plaintiff sued the defendants to recover the sum of $150 being the amount of two business taxes, one of $100 as compounders and the other of $50 as wholesale dealers under the authority of a municipal by-law.
The defendants pleaded that the by-law was illegal and ultra vires of the municipal council, and also that the statute, 47 Vic., ch. 84 P.Q. was ultra vires of the Legislature of the Province of Quebec.
The Superior Court leld that both the staute and by-law were intra vires and condemned the defendant to pay the amount claimed. On an appeal to the Court of Queen's Bench by the defendants that court confirmed the judgment of the Superior Court as regards the validity of the statute, but set aside the tax of $100 as not being authorized.
The plaintiff thereupon appealed to the Supreme Court, complaining of that part of the judgment which declares the business tax of $100 invalid. There was no cross-appeal.
On motion to quash for want of jurisdiction. Held, that the appeal would not lie,-sec. 24 (g) of the Supreme and Exchequer Courts Act, not being applicable, and the case not coming within sec. 29 of the Act ; the amount being under $2,000, no future rights within the meaning of said sec. 29 being in controversy nor any question as to the constitutionality of the Act of the legislature being raised. Strong J. dissenting on the ground that the judgment appealed from involved the question of the validity of the Provincial Act.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal side).
W.
By the judgment of the Superior Court for the pro. vince of Quebec, at Sherbrooke, rendered the 28th February, 1889, the act 47 Vic. c. 84 P. Q. was held intra vires of the Legislature of the Province of Quebec and respondents were condemned to pay to appellant one hundred and fifty dollars, being the amounts of two business taxes imposed by. a municipal by-law passed in pursuance of the provisions of said act, viz., a tax of fifty dollars on wholesale liquor dealers, and a tax of one hundred dollars on compounders and bottlers of spirituous liquors, doing business in the said city.
The Court of Queen's Bench (appeal side) modified this judgment, and dismissed the action, so far as regards the tax of one hundred dollars for the reasons : That neither the charter of the city (39 Vic. ch.
50 P. Q.) nor the amending act (47 Vic. ch. 84 P. Q.) in enumerating and specifying the different trades and occupations to be subjected to such tax, has specified the business of compounders or of bottlers of spirituous liquors ; and that this omission is not covered by the uncertain meaning to be given " to the vague, general and indefinite last lines of section seven of said act, more particularly too vague and uncertain in the matter of taxation," &c.
(2.) That the legislature had not delegated, by either of said acts or otherwise to the appellant, the power to impose the said tax of one hundred dollars, and that the by-law, in so far as regards the said tax, is ultra vires, null and void.
By their pleas the respondents impeached the constitutionality of the act, 47 Vic. ch. 84 (P.Q.), but did not file a cross-appeal on the appeal to the Supreme
Court of Canada.
Mr. Belanger for respondent moved to quash the appeal on the ground that the amount in controversy was under $2000, and that no question as to the constitutionality of any act of the legislature of the Province of Quebec was in controversy in the judgment appealed from, that court having decided in favor of the appellant on the question of constitutionality, and the respondents not having filed a cross-appeal, but being wil- IM"link to rest their case on the illegality of the by law and acquiescing in that part of the judgment which related to the constitutionality of the statute.
Mr. Brown Q. and Mr. Ferguson Q. C. for appellant contra contended that the case came within sections 24 (g) and of the Supreme and Exchequer Courts Act, and cited and relied on City of Montreal v. Corporation of Longueuil Pigeon v. The Recorder's Court of Quebec Major v. Corporation of Three Rivers Mayor, 4c. of Terrebonne v. Sisters of Providence
In any case upon the face of the record the question of the constitutionality of an act of the Legislature of the Province of Quebec was involved, and therefore the case was appealable under sec. 29 (a) of the Supreme and Exchequer Courts Act.
SIR W. J. RITCHIE C.J-In my opinion no question whatever as to quashing the by-law arises in this case. I think the words " in such like matters or things in sec. 29 of the statute refer to matters of the same nature as the title to lands, etc., previously mentioned, and I cannot see that this appeal comes within any the exceptions in that section.
I do not think that any question is raised as to the constitutionality of the Quebec statute. The decision as to that was in favour of the appellant and the respondents do not complain and no question was intended to be brought before us in respect to it. J.-On the face of the proceedings in this
Statutes and regulations cited
-
Unresolved citations
- sections 24