| Case name |
Citation |
Subject |
| Maher v. Town Council of Portland (New Brunswick, Canada) |
(1875) |
|
| Guibord Affair case (Quebec, Canada) |
(1875) |
|
| Citizen's Insurance Co. v. Parsons (Ontario, Canada) |
(1880) |
Trade and Commerce clause of Constitution |
| Russell v. The Queen (New Brunswick, Canada) |
(1882) App. Cas. 829 |
first peace, order and good government case |
| McLaren v. Caldwell (Ontario, Canada) |
(1883) |
re. powers Canadian government |
| Hodge v. the Queen |
(1883) |
double aspect doctrine of Constitution |
| The Trustees, Executor and Agency Co. v. Short |
(1888) 58 L.J.P.C. 4 |
|
| St. Catherines Milling & Lumber Co. v. The Queen (Canada) |
(1888), 14 App. Cas. 46 |
aboriginal rights |
| 1888 - suspension of criminal appeals from Canada |
| Gibbs v. Messer |
(1891) |
|
| Liquidators of the Maritime Bank of Canada v. Receiver-General of New Brunswick (New Brunswick, Canada) |
[1892] A.C. 437 |
Canadian provincial sovereignty |
| Makin v. Attorney General for New South Wales (Australia) |
(1894) |
evidence of similar fact |
| Attorney-General for Ontario v. Attorney-General for the Dominion (Ontario, Canada) |
[1896] AC 348 |
national concern doctrine of Canadian constitution |
| Union Colliery Co. of British Columbia v. Bryden (British Columbia, Canada) |
[1899] A.C. 580 |
|
| Case name |
Citation |
Subject |
| Cunningham v. Homma (British Columbia, Canada) |
[1903] A.C. 151 |
Law preventing Japanese vote found valid; overridden by the Canadian Citizenship Act 1946 |
| Attorney-General for Ontario v. Attorney-General of Canada (Reference Appeal) (Ontario, Canada) |
[1912] A.C. 571 |
|
| Royal Bank of Canada v. The King (Canada) |
[1913] A.C. 283 |
|
| Canada v. Alberta[2] (Canada) |
[1922] A.C. 191 |
Emergency doctrine of Constitution of Canada |
| Fort Frances Pulp and Paper v. Manitoba Free Press (Canada) |
(1923) |
|
| Brooks-Bidlake and Whittall Limited v. Attorney-General for British Columbia (Canada) |
[1923] A.C. 450 (P.C.) |
|
| Toronto Electric Commissioners v. Snider (Ontario, Canada) |
[1925] A.C. 396 |
|
| Nadan v. The King (Canada) |
[1926] A.C. 482(PC) |
Removal of Canadian appeal to the JCPC held unconstitutional |
| 1926 - allow criminal appeals from Canada |
| Edwards v. Canada (Attorney General) (Canada) |
[1930] A.C. 124 |
Women's right to sit in the Senate |
| Proprietary Articles Trade Association v. Attorney General of Canada (Canada) |
[1931] A.C. 310 (P.C.) |
|
| In re Regulation and Control of Aeronautics in Canada[3] (Canada) |
[1932] A.C. 54 |
|
| In re Regulation and Control of Radio Communication in Canada[4] (Canada) |
[1932] A.C. 304 |
|
| 1933 - no more criminal appeals from Canada |
| British Coal Corporation v. the King (Canada) |
[1935] A.C. 500 |
Upheld authority of Canadian Parliament to abolish appeals to the Privy Council in criminal cases. |
| Attorney-General of Canada v. Attorney-General of Ontario (Labour Conventions) (Ontario, Canada) |
[1937] A.C. 326 |
|
| Sifton v. Sifton |
[1938] A.C. 656 |
Certainty of conditions in a devise |
| Vita Food Products Inc. v. Unus Shipping Co. Ltd. (Nova Scotia, Canada) |
[1939] A.C. 277 |
An express choice of law clause in a contract should be honoured as long as the agreement was bona fide and not against public policy. |
| Francis, Day & Hunter Ltd. v. Twentieth Century Fox Corp. |
[1939] 4 D.L.R. 353 |
Copyright in titles |
| Ontario (Attorney General) v. Canada Temperance Federation (Ontario, Canada) |
(1946) |
Examined the peace, order, and good government power of the Constitution Act, 1867 |
| 1949 - no more civil appeals from Canada |
| Subramaniam v Public Prosecutor |
[1956] 1 WLR 965 |
Hearsay exception |
| Overseas Tankship v Morts Dock & Engineering Co. Ltd. (The Wagon Mound No. 1) (Australia) |
[1961] A.C. 388 |
Leading authority on remoteness of damage in negligence. |
| Overseas Tankship v Miller Steamship Co. (The Wagon Mound No. 2) (Australia) |
[1967] A.C. 617 |
Defined remoteness of damages in a nuisance tort action |
| Goldman v Hargrave |
[1967] 1 A.C. 645 |
|
| The Eurymedon (New Zealand) |
[1975] A.C. 154 |
Conditions of when a third party may seek protection of an exclusion clause in a contract between two parties. |
| Pao On v. Lau Yiu Long |
[1980] A.C. 614 |
|
| Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v. Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd |
[1980] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 851 (JCPC) |
|