Rutter v. Orde

Where competing claims exist the licence first issued by the provincial authority confers priority and vests property rights against earlier locators; differences in local nomenclature and administrative treatment do not defeat the priority of the licence first issued under s.17 of the Forest Act.

Citation: (1918) 59 SCR 658
Parties: Appellant: Rutter; Respondent: Orde
Court: Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 13 May 1918
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Final Appellate Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome: Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia affirming the trial court affirmed.
Legal Topics: Timber Licences, Description Sufficiency, Priority of Licences Under Forest Act S.17
Source Language: English

Property Law Statutory Interpretation Administrative Law Timber Licences Description Sufficiency Priority of Licences Under Forest Act S.17

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

Parties

Rutter

Appellant

Orde

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Appellate Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

1 Whether the description in a timber licence under s.17 of the B.C. Forest Act was sufficient to identify the lands
2 Whether priority is determined by first location/claim or by first issuance of a provincial timber licence
3 Whether differing place names used by competing applicants affect the validity or priority of licences when authorities treat them as covering different localities

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia affirming the trial court affirmed.

Orders

Appeal dismissed with costs