Majority
DAME M.
APPELLANTS; vir (PLAINTIFFS) ........................
*May 31. AND
*June 15. DAME ANGRLIQUE LAPIERRE, s qual., (DEFENDANT.)..............
REsPNDENT. ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH FOR LOWER CANADA (APPEAL SIDE).
Judgment of the Court
- J.-This appellant claims from the respondent by her action, a sum of $200 for an instalment of a monthly allowance due to her as she alleges in virtue of her late father's will, and of the act 54 Vic. ch. 96 of the province of Quebec passed in relation to that will. Her action has been dismissed and she now appeals.
The respondent moves to quash the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
This motion must be allowed.
This is clearly not an appealable case. The appellant argued that her appeal could be entertained on the ground that
-ha as the judgment dismissing her action, if allowed to Tasereau stand would be resjudicata between her and the respondent, and a bar for ever of her claim, her appeal came within the words " where the rights in future might be bound " of section 29 of the Supreme Court
Act. But that contention cannot prevail.
We have in numerous cases determined that these words of the statute are governed by the preceding words of the clause "fee of office, duty, rent, revenue or any sum of money payable to Her Majesty or any title to lands or tenements, annual rents, or such like matters or things."
The words " annual rents " cannot support the appeal. They mean ground rents (rentes foncieres), and not an annuity or any other like charges or obligations.
Neither can the appeal be entertained on the ground that the appellant's claim, being for a monthly allowance of $200, should be considered as being for. an amount exceeding $2,000.
The only amount actually in controversy in the present case is $200.
The consequences of the judgment and its effect on the appellant's future rights in the matter cannot render the case appealable as being a case of $2,000. This monthly allowance is liable to be extinguished at any time by the death or re-marriage of the respondent for instance, according to the terms of the will in question.
Appeal quashed with costs.
Statutes and regulations cited
-
Supreme Court Act