link to Expropriation Law Centre home page

Cases



Menu

Advertisement

Peterson Stark Scott

Advertisement


Free Case Law
[Back] DECISION DIGEST  
Record no. 2457
Case name: Balisky v. Alliance Pipeline Ltd.
Date: 2012-06-15
Jurisdiction: Canada - Federal
Court: National Energy Board Pipeline Arbitration Committee
Release registry: [Subscribers only]
Court file: [Subscribers only]
Order no.: [Subscribers only]
Parties: Name   Appearing as
  340104 Alberta Ltd.   Applicant
  Balisky, Marcia   Applicant
  Balisky, Terrance   Applicant
  Bue, Byron   Applicant
  Bue, Raymond   Applicant
  Eggers, Levke   Applicant
  Eggers, Peter   Applicant
  Ellingson, Bryan   Applicant
  Fast, Brian Peter   Applicant
  Fast, Theresa Georgina   Applicant
  Gilkyson, Florence   Applicant
  Gilkyson, Raymond   Applicant
  Hanson, Laura   Applicant
  Hanson, Stirling   Applicant
  Jones, Fern   Applicant
  Leroux, Gregory   Applicant
  Liland, Donald   Applicant
  Moe, Kristin   Applicant
  Moe, Randy   Applicant
  Moller, Franklin   Applicant
  Olley, Katherine   Applicant
  Olley, Lloyd E.   Applicant
  Piper, Kane Burl   Applicant
  Richards, Ada   Applicant
  Richards, Robert   Applicant
  Slater, Albert   Applicant
  Smith, Dale   Applicant
  Smith, Gwen   Applicant
  Strate, Gordon   Applicant
  Alliance Pipeline Ltd.   Respondent
Before: Decision maker Designation
McCartney, Jim P.A.C. Chair
  Perras, Doug P.A.C. Member
  Solomon, Glenn P.A.C. Member
Lawyers: Name   Appearing for
  Carter, J. Darryl   Applicant
  Estep, Laura Kimberley   Respondent
Experts: Name Occupation Appearing for
  Cumming, Sidney Appraiser Applicant
Taking type: [Subscribers only]
Valuation date: [Subscribers only]
Case elements: [Subscribers only]
Decision: Application by property owners to a Pipeline Arbitration Committee, appointed pursuant to the National Energy Board Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-7, to determine the amount of costs payable to the Applicants for participation in a five-year review of compensation. Claims were advanced for legal, appraisal and personal costs. The claims for appraisal and personal costs were disallowed. Claims were allowed for legal costs after several adjustments.
Comment: [Subscribers only]
Statute references: [Subscribers only]
Case references: [Subscribers only]
Related decisions:      
  Earlier
  [2002] EXLAW 16 F.C. T.D. 2002-09-13
  [2003] EXLAW 24 F.C. A.D. 2003-02-27
  [2003] EXLAW 25 S.C.C. 2003-11-27
  [2004] EXLAW 32 F.C.A. 2004-03-24
  [2006] EXLAW 13 F.C. 2006-06-07
  [2008] EXLAW 17 F.C. 2008-09-26
  [2011] EXLAW 33 FED NEB 2011-08-25
  [2011] EXLAW 34 FED NEB 2011-10-25
  [2011] EXLAW 35 FED NEB 2011-11-25
  Later
 
Neutral citation: N/A
ExLaw citation: [2012] EXLAW 35
Parallel citations:  
Reasons: [Subscribers only]
Digests contain original content produced by ExLaw and copyright in this content is held by Dicta Legal Services Ltd. (dba Expropriation Law Centre). Reasons for decision are the text of original decisions released by the court or tribunal and edited for accuracy where required. No copyright is claimed for these materials.
Join the Mailing List
Enter your name and email address below:
Name:

Email:


Subscribe 
Unsubscribe 

Online Subscription
Service
Online Subscription Service sign-up
Online Subscription Service log-in

Advertisement


© 2024 Dicta Legal Services Ltd.
Page last updated: April 21, 2024