Dallas v. Webster

plaintiff Dallas was the owner of certain shares of the capital stock of the defendant company, standing in the name of the defendant (respondent) Webster, and for an order wV.A directing the defendant (respondent) Webster (who, so plaintiffs alleged, had abandoned his purchase of the shares from Dallas) to transfer the shares.

HEDLEY T. FULTON, MINNIE PAT- TERSON

AND

MABEL

FULTON

APPELLANTS; *Oct. 20. (PLAINTIFFS)

......................

.*Dec

AND

WILLIAM P. CREELMAN (DEFENDANT).. RESPONDENT. ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA EN BANC

Trespass-Highways-Alleged existence of public right of way-Sufflciency of evidence to justify finding of dedication-Inference from circumstances-Admissibility in evidence of ancient book.

In an action of trespass, defendant alleged a public right of way across plaintiffs' land.

Held, that the evidence as to uninterrupted public user of the alleged road for a period coextensive with the memory of witnesses, along with other circumstances in evidence, justified a finding of dedication (Folkestone Corporation v. Brockman, [19141 A.C. 338, at 368, cited); and that the judgment of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia en banc, 1 M.P.R. 556, holding (by a majority, reversing judgment of Paton J., ibid) that the alleged public road exists, and dismissing plaintiffs' action for trespass, should be affirmed.

Anglin CJ.C. and Lamont J. dissented, holding that there was not sufficient evidence of dedication of the alleged highway (the only ground relied on at bar) to prove that fact; that the locus of the highway claimed to have been dedicated was left quite uncertain; and that the acts of user were wholly consistent with there having been merely a private right of way, or personal understandings for use of a way, and, while circumstances may warrant an inference of dedica- *PRESENT:-Anglin CJ.C. and Duff, Newcombe, Lamont and Cannon JJ.