Expropriation Law Centre

Cases


Menu

Advertisement

Peterson Stark Scott

Advertisement


Free Case Law
[Back] DECISION DIGEST  
Record no. 463
Case name: Osoyoos Indian Band v. Oliver (Town)
Date: 2001-12-07
Jurisdiction: Canada - Federal
Court: Supreme Court of Canada
Registry: [Subscribers only]
File: [Subscribers only]
Order no.: [Subscribers only]
Parties: Name   Appearing as
  British Columbia   Other
  Canada (Attorney General)   Other
  Oliver (Town)   Other
  Osoyoos Indian Band   Other
  Squamish Indian Band   Other
Before: Decision maker Designation
Arbour, Louise J.
  Bastarache, Michel J.
  Binnie, William Ian Corneil J.
  Gonthier, Charles Doherty J.
  Iacobucci, Frank J.
  L'Heureux-Dube, Claire J.
  LeBel, Louis J.
  Major, John C. J.
  McLachlin, Beverley Marion C.J.C.
Lawyers: Name   Appearing for
  Cockrill, Gregory H.   Other
  Donegan, Gerald   Other
  Gordon, Hunter W.   Other
  King, Mary L.   Other
  Kirchner, F. Matthew   Other
  Leadem, Timothy P.   Other
  Mandell, M. Louise   Other
  Ostrove, Clarine E.   Other
  Pinder, Leslie J.   Other
  Rich, John R.   Other
  Ring, Kathleen M.   Other
  Williamson, Barry S.   Other
  Yearwood, Paul E.   Other
Experts:  
Taking type/date: [Subscribers only]
Case elements: [Subscribers only]
Decision: Second appeal from a stated case in a property taxation matter under the Indian Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-5. At issue was whether a right of way granted to the Province of British Columbia in 1957 was a fee simple interest or a lesser interest in land similar to an easement. The right of way extended through an Indian Reserve and had been granted pursuant to the expropriation provisions of the Indian Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 149, and the Water Act, R.S.B.C. 1948, c. 361, for purposes of a concrete irrigation canal. The 1957 Order in Council authorizing the grant of the right of way did not clearly state the nature of the interest. However if the interest was an easement then the land was still part of the reserve and the interest and improvements constructed on the right of way were therefore taxable. If the interest was a fee simple interest, then the land was no longer part of the reserve and not subject to the Band's taxation by-laws.

A majority of the court held that the interest acquired by the Province was an easement and the land was still subject to taxation by the Indian Band. The appeal was allowed.
Comment: [Subscribers only]
Statute references: [Subscribers only]
Case references: [Subscribers only]
Related decisions:      
  Earlier
  [1997] EXLAW 28 B.C. S.C. 1997-04-07
  [1999] EXLAW 303 B.C. C.A. 1999-05-04
  Later
 
Neutral citation: 2001 SCC 85
ExLaw citation: [2001] EXLAW 342
Parallel citations: (2001) 110 A.C.W.S. (3d) 784
  (2001) 160 B.C.A.C. 171
  (2001) 95 B.C.L.R. (3d) 22
  (2001) 206 D.L.R. (4th) 385
  (2001) 75 L.C.R. 1
  (2001) 278 N.R. 201
  (2001) 45 R.P.R. (3d) 1
  [2001] S.C.J. No. 82
  [2001] 3 S.C.R. 746
  (2001) 261 W.A.C. 171
  [2002] 1 C.N.L.R. 271
  [2002] 1 W.W.R. 23
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


© 2022 Dicta Legal Services Ltd.
Page last updated: May 8, 2021