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. 720
Case name: Mannix v. Alberta (Minister of Environment)
Date: 1983-02-22
Jurisdiction: Canada - Alberta
Court: Court of Queen's Bench
Release registry: [Subscribers only]
Court file: [Subscribers only]
Order no.: [Subscribers only]
Parties: Name   Appearing as
  Mannix, Frederick Charles   Plaintiff
  Alberta (Minister of Environment)   Defendant
Decision makers: Name Designation
Moore, William Kenneth A.C.J.Q.B.
Lawyers: Name   Appearing for
  Hill, Karen   Plaintiff
  Lloyd, H. Derek D.   Plaintiff
  Samuelson, D.G.   Plaintiff
  Tavender, E. David D.   Plaintiff
  Mason, D. Blair   Defendant
  Prentice, Peter Eric James   Defendant
Experts: Name Occupation Appearing for
  Edwards, Barry Biologist N/A
  Gilchrist, Herbert Engineer Plaintiff
  Hopper, Alan Planner Plaintiff
  Klaasen, Romain Leon Appraiser Plaintiff
  Owsley, J.R. Appraiser Plaintiff
  Patton, Sue Planning Technologist Plaintiff
  Piluso, Tony Planner Plaintiff
  Trouth, Norman Engineer Plaintiff
  Veldman, Willem M. Hydrologist Plaintiff
  Webster, Linda Planning Technologist Plaintiff
  Werenka, Walter Engineer Plaintiff
  Dick, Colin Appraiser Defendant
  Hay, Allister M. Planner Defendant
  Shaske, Edward J. Appraiser Defendant
Taking type: [Subscribers only]
Valuation date: [Subscribers only]
Case elements: [Subscribers only]
Decision: Compensation award for expropriation of approximately 300 ac. of land within the City of Calgary. Prior to expropriation, the Plaintiff owner's land totalled in excess of 1,000 ac. The land was expropriated for Fish Creek Provincial Park pursuant to the Expropriation Act, S.A. 1974, c. 27. The Plaintiff sought compensation of approximately $22,000,000. The Defendant had made an advance payment of $5,000,000. The award for market value of the land taken, injurious affection and unusual circumstances totalled $7,141,608. A claim under the home for a home provision found in s. 45(1) of the Act was dismissed. A claim for disturbance damages was also dismissed. After deduction of the advance payment the net award was $2,141,608. Interest was also awarded and the parties were granted leave to make submissions as to costs.
Comment: [Subscribers only]
Statute references: [Subscribers only]
Case references: [Subscribers only]
ExLaw citation: [1983] EXLAW 3
Neutral citation: N/A
Parallel citations: (1983) 19 A.C.W.S. (2d) 81
  [1983] A.J. No. 961
  (1983) 47 A.R. 81
  (1983) 27 L.C.R. 13
Related decisions:      
  Earlier
  [1981] EXLAW 1 Alta. Q.B. 1981-01-16
  [1981] EXLAW 2 Alta. C.A. 1981-07-10
  Later
  [1984] EXLAW 2 Alta. C.A. 1984-10-24
  [1984] EXLAW 1 Alta. C.A. 1984-12-12
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: September 7, 2024