← Cases

Root v. McKinney

[1930] SCR 337 Court SCC Decision date 1929-10-04 English

Contents
Although the status of the signatories as such officers has been challenged, for the purpose of the disposition of this appeal it may be assumed to be established.
It is clear law that in order to justify a distress for rent the relationship of landlord and tenant must subsist between the person on whose behalf it is made and the person against whom it is directed. It is also certain that this relationship can only arise out of contract, express or implied.
The learned trial judge took the view that no tenancy existed in this case because the Chinese Nationalist League of Canada (hereinafter called " The League "), which purported to be the landlord, was an unincorporated and unregistered society and, as such, an entity unknown to the law, and, therefore, incapable of making a lease. He further held that there was no evidence to support the contention that a lease existed between the plaintiff company and some member or members of the " headquarters " of The League, inasmuch as there was nothing to show who those individuals were, or that the distress warrant was issued on their behalf, or had since been ratified by them, although there is abundant evidence of such attempted ratification by the " headquarters " itself.
The Court of Appeal, on the other hand, relying on such authorities as Rennie v. Robinson (1), and Morton v. Woods (2), held the plaintiff estopped from setting up incapacity of the alleged landlord or landlords on the ground that to do so would be tantamount to impeaching the title to the premises of the persons by whom it was let into possession of them as tenant, or of their assignees or representatives.
To what has already been said, it may be added that the evidence is entirely silent as to whether the membership of The League is to-day the same as it was when the alleged lease was made. Indeed, the fact is, no doubt otherwise.
Originally, the publishers of the Canada Morning News then unincorporated, were given possession of the premises in question under a verbal arrangement made with persons who were then officers of The League.
This occurred