| Case name: |
McDonald v. Vancouver, Victoria and Eastern Railway and Navigation Co. |
|
|
|
| Jurisdiction: |
Canada - British Columbia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parties: |
Name |
|
Appearing as |
| |
Vancouver, Victoria and Eastern Railway and Navigation Company |
|
Appellant |
| |
McDonald, Philip |
|
Respondent |
|
| Before: |
Decision maker |
Title |
|
Galliher, William Alfred |
J.A. |
| |
Macdonald, James Alexander |
C.J.A. |
| |
Martin, Archer Evans Stringer |
J.A. |
|
| Lawyers: |
Name |
|
Appearing for |
| |
MacNeill, Albert Howard |
|
Appellant |
| |
Martin, George F. |
|
Respondent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Decision: |
Appeal by the Authority from a trial court order directing the Authority to expropriate the Claimant's leasehold interest pursuant to the Railway Act, R.S.C. 1906, c. 37. The Authority was a railway company which had obtained regulatory approval to construct and operate a railway from the Board of Railway Commissioners pursuant to the Railway Act, R.S.C. 1906 c. 37. The subject property was located in Huntington. However, the Authority had not fully utilized the entire width of the approved right of way. The Claimant held a lease on land that fell within the approved right of way and the landlord had reached an agreement to transfer his interest to the Authority. However, the Authority had not taken possession of the portion encumbered by the lease. The Claimant alleged that his leasehold interest had been injuriously affected and sought the order to compel the Authority to carry out an expropriation. The Authority had chosen not to expropriate and intended to wait for the lease to expire before acquiring the subject property. The appeal was dismissed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Related decisions: |
|
|
|
| |
Earlier |
| |
[1909] EXLAW 2 |
B.C. S.C. |
1909-05-31 |
| |
Later |
| |
[1910] EXLAW 2 |
S.C.C. |
1910-12-09 |
|
|
|
| ExLaw citation: |
[1910] EXLAW 1 |
|
| Parallel citations: |
[1910] B.C.J. No. 46 |
| |
(1910) 15 B.C.R. 315 |
|
|
|
