Expropriation Law Centre




Peterson Stark Scott


Free Case Law
Record no. 643
Case name: Tomshak v. Alberta (Minister of Transportation)
Date: 2003-03-13
Jurisdiction: Canada - Alberta
Court: Land Compensation Board
Release registry: [Subscribers only]
Court file: [Subscribers only]
Order no.: [Subscribers only]
Parties: Name   Appearing as
  Gordon, Matilda   Claimant
  Moller, Franklin   Claimant
  Moller, Joan   Claimant
  Oatway, Robert Murray   Claimant
  Robideau, Ira   Claimant
  Robideau, Jennifer   Claimant
  Tomshak, Albert John   Claimant
  Tomshak, Joyce   Claimant
  Alberta (Minister of Transportation)   Authority
Before: Decision maker Designation
MacKenzie, A. Douglas Member
  McAvoy, Marilyn Member
  Weber, Fred Member
Lawyers: Name   Appearing for
  Carter, J. Darryl   Claimant
  Franklin, Stanley A.   Authority
  Workman, Paul   Authority
Experts: Name Occupation Appearing for
  Berrien, Robert Arthur Appraiser Claimant
  Weleschuk, Ivan Appraiser Claimant
  Hoover, Donald Lester Appraiser Authority
  Simpson, Bruce R. Appraiser Authority
Taking type: [Subscribers only]
Valuation date: [Subscribers only]
Case elements: [Subscribers only]
Decision: Application by the Claimants to the Alberta Land Compensation Board for determination of compensation. The application was made pursuant to the Expropriation Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. E-13. The Province of Alberta had expropriated several long narrow strips of land from ten larger parcels owned by eight Claimants. The takings were required to permit a highway widening near Grande Prairie, Alberta. The primary issue was whether the land taken should be valued on the basis of the en bloc value or whether the takings should be valued as small parcels. The Board concluded that the market value of the takings was the en bloc value. Compensation for market value of land taken was awarded in the total amount of $70,717 allocated amongst the various Claimants. In addition, fixed costs were awarded to the Claimants Tomshak in the amount of $5,950 and to the Claimant Oatway in the amount of $10,100. The matter of costs and interest was reserved.
Comment: [Subscribers only]
Statute references: [Subscribers only]
Case references: [Subscribers only]
Related decisions:      
  [2003] EXLAW 8 Alta. L.C.B. 2003-06-25
  [2003] EXLAW 10 Alta. L.C.B. 2003-08-21
  [2004] EXLAW 6 Alta. L.C.B. 2004-08-04
  [2004] EXLAW 14 Alta. C.A. 2004-10-28
  [2008] EXLAW 12 Alta. L.C.B. 2008-09-18
  [2008] EXLAW 18 Alta. L.C.B. 2008-12-12
  [2009] EXLAW 12 Alta. L.C.B. 2009-08-10
Neutral citation:
ExLaw citation: [2003] EXLAW 5
Parallel citations: (2003) 80 L.C.R. 203
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:


Online Subscription
Online Subscription Service sign-up
Online Subscription Service log-in


© 2023 Dicta Legal Services Ltd.
Page last updated: September 12, 2023