Trenton (Town) v. B.W. Powers & Son Ltd.

Trenton (Town) v. B.W. Powers & Son Ltd.

Hawley conveyed Street X in 1850 and therefore lacked title when his 1864 plan was prepared so no dedication of Street X occurred; the disputed portion of Ontario Street lay within a 70-acre water lot granted by the Crown in 1876 and s.1 of the Beds of Navigable Waters Act prevents the bed passing by implication, so...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1969] SCR 584
Parties
Defendant/appellant: The Corporation of the Town of Trenton; Plaintiff/respondent: B.W. Powers & Son Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 March 1969
Procedural Posture
Final Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada / Appeal From the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Judgment on Appeal From Trial Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Dedication of Land, Public Highways, Ad Medium Filum Rule, Beds of Navigable Waters Act, Title by Crown Grant
Source Language
english
Property Law Real Property Dedication of Land Public Highways Ad Medium Filum Rule Beds of Navigable Waters Act Title by Crown Grant

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Corporation of the Town of Trenton

Defendant/appellant

B.W. Powers & Son Limited

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Final Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada / Appeal From the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Judgment on Appeal From Trial Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether two parcels shown as public highways on an 1864 subdivision plan were dedicated to the public and vested in the municipality
  2. 2 Whether the maker of the 1864 plan (Hawley) owned the lands shown as streets at the time the plan was prepared
  3. 3 Whether the ad medium filum rule applied to the bed of the navigable Trent River portion shown on the plan

Ratio Decidendi

Hawley conveyed Street X in 1850 and therefore lacked title when his 1864 plan was prepared so no dedication of Street X occurred; the disputed portion of Ontario Street lay within a 70-acre water lot granted by the Crown in 1876 and s.1 of the Beds of Navigable Waters Act prevents the bed passing by implication, so title remained with the Crown grantee and its successors, entitling the respondent to ownership; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Trial judgment affirmed: declaration that respondent is owner of the disputed lands and order that appellant pay damages for trespass.