link to Expropriation Law Centre home page

Cases



Menu

Advertisement

Expropriation Law Centre

Advertisement


Free Case Law
[Back] DECISION DIGEST  
Record no. 1111
Case name: Thompson v. Alberta (Minister of Environment)
Date: 2006-07-26
Jurisdiction: Canada - Alberta
Court: Court of Queen's Bench
Release registry: [Subscribers only]
Court file: [Subscribers only]
Order no.: [Subscribers only]
Parties: Name   Appearing as
  Thompson, Gordon V.   Claimant
  Alberta (Minister of Environment)   Respondent
Before: Decision maker Designation
Park, Alexander G. J.
Lawyers: Name   Appearing for
  Ham, Kenneth Hugh Patrick   Claimant
  Mavko, Timothy C.   Respondent
  McNaughton, Sheila Catherine   Respondent
Experts: Name Occupation Appearing for
  Berrien, Robert Arthur Appraiser Claimant
  Hudema, Terry Surveyor Claimant
  Donaldson, Gregory Robert Planner Respondent
  Geoffrey, Gordon Alexander Engineer Respondent
  Navrady, Alexander Maxwell (Sandy) Appraiser Respondent
Taking type: [Subscribers only]
Valuation date: [Subscribers only]
Case elements: [Subscribers only]
Decision: Application by the Claimant to the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench for determination of compensation pursuant to the Expropriation Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. E-13. The subject property was an 18.83 ha. parcel located on the south-east edge of the City of Calgary. It was acquired by the Authority as a full taking for purposes of a transportation and utility corridor. Prior to expropriation, the subject property had been designated as a Restricted Development Area (RDA). The Authority made an advance payment in the amount of $1,025,000. The Claimant sought compensation in the amount of $1,768,000. The primary issue in dispute between the parties was the effect to be given to s. 45 of the Act and whether the RDA designation should be taken into account. It was held that the RDA should be taken into account to the extent that it applied to adjacent lands before the subject property was designated. Compensation was awarded in the amount of $1,120,000 for market value of the land taken.
Comment: [Subscribers only]
Statute references: [Subscribers only]
Case references: [Subscribers only]
Related decisions:      
  Earlier
 
  Later
  [2007] EXLAW 12 Alta. C.A. 2007-12-17
Neutral citation: 2006 ABQB 510
ExLaw citation: [2006] EXLAW 8
Parallel citations: (2006) 152 A.C.W.S. (3d) 854
  [2006] A.J. No. 933
  (2006) 90 L.C.R. 161
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