Bowman v. Panyard Machine & Mfg. Co.

ing, as distinguished from a merely departmental transaction; the Minister of Railways and Canals, if he executed the contract, was acting, THE KING not in the exercise of his administrative powers as such minister, but in the execution of a special authority deputed to him by the Govern- CoRP.

ment; the reference was, therefore, unauthorized, and the Exchequer Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the claim. On this ground, the appeal was allowed.

Dealing with the other grounds of the Crown's motion, it was held, that its contention that the reference had been withdrawn by Order in Council, was successfully met by claimant's answer of res judicata, this contention having been rejected by the Exchequer Court on a previous motion; that, as to the statement of claim, in so far as it might substantially depart from or exceed the claim set out in claimant's letter, it transcended the jurisdiction of the Exchequer Court, which was restricted to the very claim referred to it by the Minister; but the objection in this respect (if a proper subject of appeal to this Court) presented matter for the exercise of discretion as to amendment, rather than a ground for striking out the claimant's pleadings or otherwise summarily determining its action.

APPEAL by the Crown from the judgment of Maclean J., President of the Exchequer Court of Canada (1) dismissing its motion for an order granting leave to withdraw a reference to that court of the claim against His Majesty presented by the claimants, or, alternatively, for an order striking out the statement of claim filed.

The material facts of the case, and the grounds of the motion, are sufficiently stated in the judgment now reported. The appeal was allowed.

ANGLIN C.J.C.-The Crown appeals from an order of the Exchequer Court dismissing a motion made on its behalf that it be permitted to withdraw the reference to that Court of a claim against His Majesty presented by the claimants, or, alternatively, that their statement of claim be struck out. The Acting Minister of Railways and Canals, purporting to do so under s. 38 of the Exchequer Court Act, referred to that Court this claim, then before (1) [1927] Ex. C.R.