| Case name: |
Denault v. Barclay |
|
|
|
| Jurisdiction: |
Canada - British Columbia |
|
| Court: |
Expropriation Compensation Board |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parties: |
Name |
|
Appearing as |
| |
Barclay, Mary Dawson |
|
Claimant |
| |
Barclay, Winston Churchill |
|
Claimant |
| |
Denault, Eugene |
|
Authority |
|
| Before: |
Decision maker |
Designation |
|
Shorthouse, Robert W.C. |
Chair |
|
| Lawyers: |
Name |
|
Appearing for |
| |
Humphries, Thomas R. |
|
Claimant |
| |
Ruud, E. Sigurd |
|
Authority |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Decision: |
Application by two property owners to prevent expropriation of an easement for a water line through their property. The expropriation would be carried out by the owner of adjacent land pursuant to the Water Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 483. This neighbour held two water licences issued under the Water Act which authorized the expropriation proceedings.
The water pipeline in question had been in place for many years pursuant to an existing registered easement. The purpose of the expropriation was to widen the existing easement area. However, the existing easement had been the subject of previous litigation between these parties which resulted in a court order restricting the access rights available. The property owners alleged that the Water Act expropriation should not proceed on the basis that the issues had previously been decided in the courts (res judicata).
The owners' application was heard by the Expropriation Compensation Board. The Board is required by the Water Act to determine the nature and terms of the easement. The Board held that the prior litigation did not prevent these Water Act proceedings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ExLaw citation: |
[2000] EXLAW 331 |
|
| Parallel citations: |
(2000) 71 L.C.R. 185 |
|
|
|
