| Case name: |
Caine v. Surrey (District) |
|
|
|
| Jurisdiction: |
Canada - British Columbia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parties: |
Name |
|
Appearing as |
| |
Caine, George S. |
|
Plaintiff |
| |
Cotton, Arthur F. |
|
Defendant |
| |
Stevenson |
|
Defendant |
| |
Surrey (District) |
|
Defendant |
|
| Before: |
Decision maker |
Designation |
|
Clement, William Henry Pope |
J. |
|
| Lawyers: |
Name |
|
Appearing for |
| |
Taylor, Sidney S. |
|
Plaintiff |
| |
McQuarrie, W.G. |
|
Defendant |
| |
Whiteside, W.J. |
|
Defendant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Decision: |
Action by a property owner for an injunction to prevent the District of Surrey from constructing a road over the Plaintiff's property. The District had enacted a bylaw that purported to resume a portion of the subject property pursuant to the Municipal Act, S.B.C. 1914, c. 52. However, the Act contained an exemption for land in use as a garden. It was held that the portion of the Plaintiff's land which the District sought to resume was a garden and the exemption applied. The power of resumption was not available to the District in this case. The injunction was granted. Costs were awarded to the Plaintiff. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ExLaw citation: |
[1919] EXLAW 2 |
|
| Parallel citations: |
[1919] B.C.J. No. 34 |
| |
(1919) 27 B.C.R. 23 |
|
|
|
