St. Michael's College v. City of Toronto

St. Michael's College v. City of Toronto

Whether or not a complete formal agreement was reached, the college was entitled to equitable compensation because the city assumed possession and constructed a lasting public street; fair compensation includes the value to the college of lands taken (not confined to market value), diminution in value of retained property, indemnity for removal and re‑erection and necessary alterations, with values as of date of possession (11 Nov 1921) and interest from that date, and the constituted board of arbitrators should determine the quantum and related questions; certain conveyances and street closures as agreed were to be declared and effected.

Citation
[1926] SCR 318
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): St. Michael's College; Respondent (defendant): The Corporation of the City of Toronto
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 March 1926
Procedural Posture
Expropriation / Municipal / Equitable Relief (specific Performance / Injunction) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; judgment of Appellate Division varied; declaratory relief granted; matter remitted to constituted board of arbitrators/Master to determine quantum.
Legal Topics
Compensation for Expropriation, Equitable Compensation Vs Market Value, Specific Performance of Settlement, Arbitration to Fix Compensation, Statutory Exemption From Taking (university Act S.15)
Source Language
English
Municipal Law Property Law Equity Expropriation Administrative Law Compensation for Expropriation Equitable Compensation Vs Market Value Specific Performance of Settlement +2 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

St. Michael's College

Appellant (plaintiff)

The Corporation of the City of Toronto

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Expropriation / Municipal / Equitable Relief (specific Performance / Injunction) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether parties reached a binding settlement agreement as to compensation
  2. 2 If no concluded agreement, whether college is entitled to equitable compensation because city entered possession and constructed street
  3. 3 Proper measure of compensation (market value vs value to college and diminution to retained property)

Ratio Decidendi

Whether or not a complete formal agreement was reached, the college was entitled to equitable compensation because the city assumed possession and constructed a lasting public street; fair compensation includes the value to the college of lands taken (not confined to market value), diminution in value of retained property, indemnity for removal and re‑erection and necessary alterations, with values as of date of possession (11 Nov 1921) and interest from that date, and the constituted board of arbitrators should determine the quantum and related questions; certain conveyances and street closures as agreed were to be declared and effected.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; judgment of Appellate Division varied; declaratory relief granted; matter remitted to constituted board of arbitrators/Master to determine quantum.

Orders

  • Declare corporation took possession under agreement to close and convey specified parts of Elmsley Place and lane to the college and to submit compensation to a board of arbitrators
  • Declare compensation to include: (1) value to the college of the land taken; (2) diminution in value to college of retained property including lands acquired for arts college site caused by construction/maintenance and severance, less specified allowances; (3) interest on amounts from 11 November 1921; (4) indemnity...