| Case name: |
Genstar Development Co. v. Greater Vancouver (Regional District) |
|
|
|
| Jurisdiction: |
Canada - British Columbia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parties: |
Name |
|
Appearing as |
| |
Genstar Development Company |
|
Petitioner |
| |
Greater Vancouver (Regional District) |
|
Respondent |
|
| Before: |
Decision maker |
Designation |
|
Esson, William A. |
C.J.S.C. |
|
| Lawyers: |
Name |
|
Appearing for |
| |
Alexander, L. John |
|
Petitioner |
| |
Hanman, Charles Edward |
|
Petitioner |
| |
Macintosh, George K. |
|
Respondent |
| |
Sloman, Robert P. |
|
Respondent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Decision: |
Application by the owner for a declaration that the interest and cost provisions of the Expropriation Act, S.B.C. 1987, c. 23 apply to an arbitration conducted pursuant to the expropriation provisions of the Municipal Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 290. The Expropriation Act was new legislation that was more generous to claimants with respect to interest and costs. The arbitration had commenced pursuant to the older Municipal Act legislation and prior to enactment of the Expropriation Act. The court held that the Expropriation Act did not apply to the arbitration. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ExLaw citation: |
[1990] EXLAW 136 |
|
| Parallel citations: |
(1990) 19 A.C.W.S. (3d) 544 |
| |
[1990] B.C.J. No. 195 |
| |
(1990) 43 B.C.L.R. (2d) 48 |
| |
(1990) 43 L.C.R. 160 |
| |
(1990) 49 M.P.L.R. 311 |
|
|
|
