Expropriation Law Centre

Cases

 
You are here: Home > Cases
Menu

Advertisement

Cohen Highley LLP

Advertisement


Free Case Law
[Back] DECISION DIGEST  
Record no. 1582
Case name: Canada (Attorney General) v. Hudson's Bay Co.
Date: 1921-03-10
Jurisdiction: Canada - Federal
Court: Exchequer Court of Canada
Registry: [Subscribers only]
File: [Subscribers only]
Order no.: [Subscribers only]
Parties: Name   Appearing as
  Canada (Attorney General)   Plaintiff
  Alunite Mining and Products Co.   Defendant
  Hudson's Bay Co.   Defendant
  Puget Sound Agricultural Company   Defendant
Before: Decision maker Title
Audette, Louis-Arthur J.
Lawyers: Name   Appearing for
  Moore, H.W.R.   Plaintiff
  Lawson, H.G.   Defendant
  Miller, E.   Defendant
  Robertson, H.W.   Defendant
Experts:  
Taking type/date: [Subscribers only]
Case elements: [Subscribers only]
Decision: Application by Canada to the Exchequer Court for determination of compensation to be paid to the Defendants pursuant to the Expropriation Act, R.S.C. 1906, c. 143, following expropriation of three parcels of land for purposes of a dry dock. The subject property was located in Esquimalt, B.C. The court awarded $47,110 for market value of the land taken and all damages resulting from the expropriation. The award was allocated between two of the Defendants who were registered owners of the three parcels. A third Defendant was a tenant pursuant to a lease of one of the parcels. The tenant's claim was dismissed due to the fact the lease had not been registered contrary to requirements of the Land Registry Act, R.S.B.C. 1911, c. 127. Interest was awarded in one of the successful claims and denied in the other. Cost awards were also made one in favour of a Defendant and one in favour of the expropriating authority.
Comment: [Subscribers only]
Statute references: [Subscribers only]
Case references: [Subscribers only]
Related decisions:      
  Earlier
 
  Later
 
Neutral citation:  
ExLaw citation: [1921] EXLAW 2
Parallel citations: (1921) 65 D.L.R. 569
  [1921] EX. C. J. 3
  (1921) 20 Ex.C.R. 413
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