link to Expropriation Law Centre home page

Cases



Menu
Home
News
Events
Statutes
Cases
Articles
Reviews
Photos
Statistics
Publications
Professional Directory
Links

Advertisement

Peterson Stark Scott

Advertisement


Free Case Law
[Back] DECISION DIGEST  
Record no. 496
Case name: Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Vancouver (City)
Date: 2002-10-29
Jurisdiction: Canada - British Columbia
Court: Supreme Court
Release registry: [Subscribers only]
Court file: [Subscribers only]
Order no.: [Subscribers only]
Parties: Name   Appearing as
  Canadian Pacific Railway Company   Petitioner
  Vancouver (City)   Respondent
Decision makers: Name Designation
Brown, Brenda J. J.
Lawyers: Name   Appearing for
  Kenward, Peter H.   Petitioner
  Horne, Susan B.   Respondent
  Macintosh, George K.   Respondent
Experts:  
Taking type: [Subscribers only]
Valuation date: [Subscribers only]
Case elements: [Subscribers only]
Decision: Application by Canadian Pacific Railway for judicial review of the City of Vancouver Arbutus Corridor Official Development Plan Bylaw. The Petitioner alleged that the bylaw was beyond the City's power because it designated the Petitioner's property exclusively for public uses. Alternatively, the Petitioner alleged that enactment of the bylaw had constructively expropriated the Petitioner's property. The bylaw was set aside.
Comment: [Subscribers only]
Statute references: [Subscribers only]
Case references: [Subscribers only]
ExLaw citation: [2002] EXLAW 327
Neutral citation: 2002 BCSC 1507
Parallel citations: (2002) 117 A.C.W.S. (3d) 629
  (2002) 47 Admin. L.R. (3d) 56
  [2002] B.C.J. No. 2451
  (2002) 33 M.P.L.R. (3d) 214
Related decisions:      
  Earlier
 
  Later
  [2003] EXLAW 331 B.C. C.A. 2003-08-22
  [2004] EXLAW 304 B.C. C.A. 2004-04-07
  [2004] EXLAW 20 S.C.C. 2004-12-16
  [2006] EXLAW 301 S.C.C. 2006-02-23
  [2015] EXLAW 1 B.C. S.C. 2015-01-20
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: June 3, 2024