Canada Case Law

Chen v. Langley (Township)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The application is dismissed because the Expropriation Act bars disputing the expropriating authority's choice of expropriation method in compensation proceedings (s.4(2)) and any challenge to Council's decision required timely judicial review under s.51 and is now out of time; alternatively, the evidence shows the expropriation vested as a less-than-fee interest under s.23(3) and the Land Title Act does not authorize the court to direct the Registrar to correct title in the manner sought (s.383).

Source excerpt

• Statutory right-of-way
• Vesting of interests
• Judicial review time limits
• Registrar jurisdiction
• Interpretation of expropriation act s.4(2), s.23, s.51
• Land title act ss.107,115,383

Read case analysis

Carvery v. Halifax (City)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

To be joined a potential plaintiff must demonstrate an interest in the issues by establishing they were an owner, occupier, or other person interested in the land as of the date of expropriation under the Halifax City Charter 1963; individuals who executed Indentures prior to the expropriation quitclaimed their interests and cannot be joined on that basis, their descendants likewise cannot be joined absent an independent proprietary interest at the expropriation date, minors cannot be joined on the basis of mere residence absent a guardian/trustee holding title or charge/control at the time,…

Source excerpt

• Joinder
• Standing
• Representative order
• Release
• Indentures/quitclaims
• Minors and capacity

Read case analysis

S & R Sawmills Ltd. v. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Court fixed expropriation compensation at $39,541,237.50, rejected a $450,000 deduction for Mainland’s leasehold, and awarded costs to S&R.

• Market value assessment
• Compensation under expropriation act
• Leasehold valuation and apportionment
• Riparian setbacks and land use restrictions
• Expert evidence admissibility and weight
• Shadow of expropriation

Read case analysis

Amix Real Estate Holdings Ltd. v. British Columbia (Minister of Transportation)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed an application to add Amix Recycling Ltd. as a plaintiff, finding its proposed expropriation claim was frivolous and not tied to a statutory right to compensation.

• Definition of owner under expropriation act
• S.3 agreement (transfer without expropriation)
• Disturbance damages and business losses
• Adding parties under rule 6-2(7)(c)
• Limitation period and amendment of parties (limitation act s.22)
• Expropriation-law

Read case analysis

West Point Rail & Timber Co. v. Tahtsa Timber Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed West Point’s Railway Act expropriation claim, holding the Railway Safety Act is not a “special Act” and Part 7 powers did not apply.

• Statutory interpretation
• Expropriation powers
• Compensation assessment
• Fixture vs chattel
• Disturbance damages
• Expert evidence admissibility

Read case analysis

Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v. British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Teal Cedar’s claims over the Haida Gwaii land use order were dismissed. The court found no breach of good faith, no constructive taking, and no enforceable oral promise.

• Constructive taking
• Injurious affection
• Duty to exercise contractual discretion in good faith
• Oral promise to keep whole
• Allowable annual cut
• Land use objectives order (luoo)

Read case analysis

Shute v. Paradise (Town)

Court

Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal

The Board's valuation based on the Town appraiser was upheld because the Shutes failed to adduce contrary valuation evidence and their higher HABU theory was raised for the first time on appeal without evidentiary foundation; disturbance damages require relocation and economic loss and do not encompass non-pecuniary distress under URPA, so the Board's non-pecuniary award was set aside; the severance claim failed because the area had no marketable value due to setback rules and was not severed by expropriation; the Supreme Court's award of pre-hearing solicitor-client costs was affirmed and th…

Source excerpt

• Valuation of expropriated interest
• Disturbance damages
• Injurious affection
• Severance damages
• Costs (party-and-party vs solicitor-client)
• Highest and best use

Read case analysis

Vachon v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court struck the judicial review application challenging the Lac-Mégantic rail bypass expropriation and refused amendment, finding no reasonable prospect of success.

• Expropriation act interpretation (ss.4, 4.1)
• Bias (closed mind standard)
• Standard of review (reasonableness)
• Motion to strike (plain and obvious / doomed to fail)
• Amendment of pleadings (rule 75)
• Canada transportation act s.98

Read case analysis

Chen v. Langley (Township)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the owners had no reasonable expectation of ALR exclusion in 2017, gave little weight to a conditional sale contract, and fixed fair market value at $10.5 million.

• Fair market value
• Alr exclusion
• Highest and best use
• Appraisal evidence
• Disclosure obligations
• Interest and costs

Read case analysis

Denis Vachon (Estate of) v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed a motion to stay expropriation notices tied to the Lac-Mégantic rail bypass, finding no serious issue, irreparable harm, or balance of convenience.

• Interlocutory injunction
• Public interest
• Expropriation under expropriation act
• Canada transportation act approval
• Environmental assessment
• Compensation

Read case analysis