Canadian National Ry. Co v. Harricana Gold Mine Inc.

Canadian National Ry. Co v. Harricana Gold Mine Inc.

Majority held the trial judge proceeded on a wrong principle by valuing unsubdivided land as if subdivided; appellate court may reduce an award that is clearly excessive; sums payable under the private agreement to the province are not recoverable from the appellant and cannot enhance land value; indemnity fixed at $8,705 and lands vested in the railway except mines and minerals.

Citation
[1943] SCR 382
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Canadian National Railway Company; Respondent/plaintiff: Harricana Gold Mine Inc.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 May 1943
Procedural Posture
Expropriation Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada / On Appeal From the Exchequer Court of Canada
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Exchequer Court set aside and substituted: lands expropriated declared property of appellant (except mines and minerals); indemnity reduced.
Legal Topics
Compensation, Valuation Methodology, Quantum of Damages, Reservation of Future Claims, Mines and Minerals
Source Language
English
Expropriation Property Transportation Administrative Law Compensation Valuation Methodology Quantum of Damages Reservation of Future Claims +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Canadian National Railway Company

Appellant/defendant

Harricana Gold Mine Inc.

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Expropriation Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada / On Appeal From the Exchequer Court of Canada

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the trial judge's valuation principle correct where lands were valued as if subdivided rather than by present value of advantages?
  2. 2 Whether appellate court should interfere on quantum as clearly excessive.
  3. 3 Whether respondent could reserve right to claim future sums (including amounts payable to province) after award.

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held the trial judge proceeded on a wrong principle by valuing unsubdivided land as if subdivided; appellate court may reduce an award that is clearly excessive; sums payable under the private agreement to the province are not recoverable from the appellant and cannot enhance land value; indemnity fixed at $8,705 and lands vested in the railway except mines and minerals.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Exchequer Court set aside and substituted: lands expropriated declared property of appellant (except mines and minerals); indemnity reduced.

Orders

  • Declare expropriated lands (dates: Nov 18, 1936; Oct 9, 1937; Mar 13, 1939) vested in appellant except mines and minerals.
  • Fix indemnity for lands and all damages resulting from expropriation at $8,705 with interest apportioned to dates of taking.