| Case name: |
Victoria (City) v. Bailey |
|
|
|
| Jurisdiction: |
Canada - Federal |
|
| Court: |
Supreme Court of Canada |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parties: |
Name |
|
Appearing as |
| |
Moody, Thomas Gage |
|
Claimant |
| |
Victoria (City) |
|
Authority |
| |
Bailey, Samuel Oscar |
|
Other |
| |
British Columbia (Attorney General) |
|
Other |
| |
Cameron Investment and Securities Co. Ltd. |
|
Other |
|
| Before: |
Decision maker |
Designation |
|
Anglin, Francis Alexander |
J. |
| |
Brodeur, Louis-Philippe |
J. |
| |
Duff, Lyman Poore |
J. |
| |
Idington, John |
J. |
| |
Mignault, Pierre-Basile |
J. |
|
| Lawyers: |
Name |
|
Appearing for |
| |
Leitch |
|
Claimant |
| |
Ritchie, J.A. |
|
Claimant |
| |
Mayers, Edward C. |
|
Authority |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Decision: |
Appeal by a mortgagee from a lower court ruling which held that a portion of the land securing the mortgagee's loan was a public highway. On this appeal, the court held that the Authority's expropriation by-law dated January 22, 1912 had not been published in the British Columbia Gazette as required by the Municipal Act, R.S.B.C. 1911, c. 170, s. 53(176). As such the expropriation was not valid. In addition, the facts necessary to establish that the subject property had become a public highway by common law dedication and acceptance were not present here. The Authority was not entitled to registration with priority over the mortgage. The appeal was allowed with costs to the mortgagee. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ExLaw citation: |
[1920] EXLAW 1 |
|
| Parallel citations: |
(1920) 54 D.L.R. 50 |
| |
[1920] S.C.J. No. 2 |
| |
(1920) 60 S.C.R. 38 |
| |
[1920] 1 W.W.R. 917 |
|
|
|
