Attorney-General for British Columbia v. Miller

Attorney-General for British Columbia v. Miller

Section 52(1) of the Land Act bars the passing of bed or shore below the visible high‑water mark where the Crown grant plan shows the water coloured other than red, notwithstanding any subsequent certificate of title; on the evidence the Thorpe government survey (1969, rechecked 1971), corroborated by Moore's field notes and Smith's subdivision plan, correctly fixed the natural boundary at the time of the Crown grant and at suit, excluding the disputed land from the respondent's title, so the appeal is allowed and the trial judgment restored.

Citation
[1975] 1 SCR 556
Parties
Defendant Appellant: Attorney-General for British Columbia; Plaintiff Respondent: Dr. J.S. Miller
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 April 1974
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (declaratory Action Concerning Title to Lakefront Land)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal set aside; trial judgment restored.
Legal Topics
Natural Boundary, Crown Grant, Certificate of Indefeasible Title, Land Act S.52(1), Boundary Surveys
Source Language
English
Property Law Land Law Administrative Law Natural Boundary Crown Grant Certificate of Indefeasible Title Land Act S.52(1) Boundary Surveys

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney-General for British Columbia

Defendant Appellant

Dr. J.S. Miller

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (declaratory Action Concerning Title to Lakefront Land)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the certificate of indefeasible title covered the disputed beach land
  2. 2 Whether s.52(1) of the Land Act prevents part of the bed or shore below the natural boundary from passing to a grantee notwithstanding a certificate of title
  3. 3 What the position of the natural boundary (visible high‑water mark) was at the time of the Crown grant and at the time of suit

Ratio Decidendi

Section 52(1) of the Land Act bars the passing of bed or shore below the visible high‑water mark where the Crown grant plan shows the water coloured other than red, notwithstanding any subsequent certificate of title; on the evidence the Thorpe government survey (1969, rechecked 1971), corroborated by Moore's field notes and Smith's subdivision plan, correctly fixed the natural boundary at the time of the Crown grant and at suit, excluding the disputed land from the respondent's title, so the appeal is allowed and the trial judgment restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal set aside; trial judgment restored.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal set aside