Dominion Atlantic Ry. Co. v. Halifax and South Western Ry. Co.

Dominion Atlantic Ry. Co. v. Halifax and South Western Ry. Co.

Appellant failed to prove exclusive possession or that respondent and its predecessors had been out of possession after the lease expired; therefore no prescriptive title arose and the Statute of Limitations did not extinguish respondent's paper title.

Citation
[1947] SCR 107
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Dominion Atlantic Railway Company; Respondent/plaintiff: Halifax and South Western Railway Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 December 1946
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (possession/ejectment) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia in Banco
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment below affirmed; costs to respondent.
Legal Topics
Lease Vs Licence, Adverse Possession/prescription, Possession, Easement by Prescription, Statute of Limitations
Source Language
English
Property Transport/railway Law Civil Procedure Limitation Law Lease Vs Licence Adverse Possession/prescription Possession Easement by Prescription +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dominion Atlantic Railway Company

Appellant/defendant

Halifax and South Western Railway Company

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (possession/ejectment) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia in Banco

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether continued use after expiration of a one year demise gave appellant prescriptive title under the Statute of Limitations
  2. 2 Whether the 1918 indenture created exclusive possession in the appellant during the term sufficient to found prescription after expiry
  3. 3 Whether respondent and its predecessors were dispossessed or otherwise out of possession so as to allow extinguishment of paper title

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant failed to prove exclusive possession or that respondent and its predecessors had been out of possession after the lease expired; therefore no prescriptive title arose and the Statute of Limitations did not extinguish respondent's paper title.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment below affirmed; costs to respondent.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Declaration that respondent is owner of the disputed portion of the siding and entitled to possession.