This is a list of major cases decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. These include appeals from the following countries:[1]
| 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. Catharines 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 |
| Attorney General of Canada v. Attorney General of Ontario | [1898] A.C. 700 (P.C.) | turf war aka Provincial Fisheries Reference[2] |
| 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 |
| Bank of Montreal v Stuart | [1910] UKPC 53 | Undue influence |
| 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[3] (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 – criminal appeals from Canada permitted | ||
| 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[4] (Canada) | [1932] A.C. 54 | |
| In re Regulation and Control of Radio Communication in Canada[5] (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 (Hong Kong) | [1980] A.C. 614 | |
| Ong Ah Chuan v. Public Prosecutor (Singapore) | [1980] UKPC 32, [1981] A.C. 648, [1981] 1 M.L.J. [Malayan Law Journal] 64, [1979–1980] S.L.R.(R.) [Singapore Law Reports (Reissue)] 710 | Constitutionality of provisions in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1973 (No. 5 of 1973) creating a rebuttable presumption of drug trafficking and imposing the mandatory death penalty for certain drug trafficking offences. |
| Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v. Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd | [1980] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 851 (JCPC) | |
| 1989 – appeals from Singapore restricted | ||
| Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi-Keung (Hong Kong) | [1990] UKPC 9 | |
| 1994 – no more appeals from Singapore | ||
| Goss v Chilcott | [1996] UKPC 17 (23 May 1996) | |
| 1997 – no more appeals from Hong Kong | ||