| Case name: |
Ingham v. Creston (Town) |
|
|
|
| Jurisdiction: |
Canada - British Columbia |
|
| Court: |
Expropriation Compensation Board |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parties: |
Name |
|
Appearing as |
| |
Ingham, Albert Cecil |
|
Claimant |
| |
Ingham, Lillian Rose |
|
Claimant |
| |
Jamieson, Frank Herbert |
|
Claimant |
| |
Jamieson, Mildred Johanna |
|
Claimant |
| |
Kowalski, Helen |
|
Claimant |
| |
Kowalski, Russel |
|
Claimant |
| |
Kowalski, Samuel |
|
Claimant |
| |
Creston (Town) |
|
Authority |
|
| Decision makers: |
Name |
Designation |
|
Walls, Sharon I. |
Vice-Chair |
|
| Lawyers: |
Name |
|
Appearing for |
| |
McBain, Lisa D. |
|
Claimant |
| |
Melville, J. Bruce |
|
Authority |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Decision: |
Motion for a determination of whether the Expropriation Compensation Board had jurisdiction to conduct two final cost reviews pursuant to s. 45 of the Expropriation Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 125. Compensation awards had been made by the Board but the awards had been set aside by the Court of Appeal. The Court had remitted the issue of injurious affection back to the Board for reconsideration but at the time the motion was heard, the Board had not yet done so. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ExLaw citation: |
[1999] EXLAW 302 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
