City of Edmonton v. Walter Woods Ltd.

City of Edmonton v. Walter Woods Ltd.

The City Act authorizes compensation for injurious affection caused by municipal construction even where no land is formally expropriated; the trial judge properly applied the statute and the amount awarded was within his discretion and correctly affirmed by the appellate court.

Citation
[1964] SCR 250
Parties
Defendant Appellant: City of Edmonton; Plaintiff Respondent: Walter Woods Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 February 1964
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (municipal Expropriation) / Hearing on Appeal at the Supreme Court of Canada From Alberta Appellate Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Injurious Affection, Compensation for Loss of Business, Statutory Interpretation of Municipal Compensation Provisions
Source Language
English
Municipal Law Expropriation Property Law Damages Injurious Affection Compensation for Loss of Business Statutory Interpretation of Municipal Compensation Provisions

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

City of Edmonton

Defendant Appellant

Walter Woods Limited

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (municipal Expropriation) / Hearing on Appeal at the Supreme Court of Canada From Alberta Appellate Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether owner is entitled to compensation for injurious affection where a municipal overpass is built on a public street in front of the property without formal expropriation
  2. 2 Whether ss.303 and 309 of The City Act as amended authorize compensation for loss of business caused by municipal works
  3. 3 Whether the appellate court should interfere with the trial judge's factual assessment and quantum of compensation

Ratio Decidendi

The City Act authorizes compensation for injurious affection caused by municipal construction even where no land is formally expropriated; the trial judge properly applied the statute and the amount awarded was within his discretion and correctly affirmed by the appellate court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Costs awarded to the respondent