Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank, (1998) 172 Sask.R. 133 (CA)
Judge | Bayda, C.J.S., Vancise and Wakeling, JJ.A. |
Court | Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan) |
Case Date | Tuesday December 01, 1998 |
Jurisdiction | Saskatchewan |
Citations | (1998), 172 Sask.R. 133 (CA) |
Busse Farms Ltd. v. FBDB (1998), 172 Sask.R. 133 (CA);
185 W.A.C. 133
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [1998] Sask.R. TBEd. DE.044
Busse Farms Ltd. (plaintiff/appellant) v. Federal Business Development Bank (defendant/respondent)
(Docket No. 2607)
Indexed As: Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank
Saskatchewan Court of Appeal
Bayda, C.J.S., Vancise and
Wakeling, JJ.A.
December 1, 1998.
Summary:
The plaintiff purchased foreclosed commercial property from the Federal Business Development Bank, intending to run it for several years then sell it at a profit. Unknown to anyone, the property was contaminated by an underground fuel leak, which had to be cleaned up under the Environmental Maintenance and Protection Act. The plaintiff, after unsuccessful efforts to clean up the contamination, wanted to rescind the contract or receive damages under s. 13(3) of the Act as compensation. The Bank declined and cleaned up the property itself at a cost of $65,000. The plaintiff sold the property, not realizing the profit it expected. The plaintiff sued for damages in excess of $200,000, claiming the Bank was liable for selling it contaminated property.
The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, in a judgment reported in 150 Sask.R. 305, dismissed the action. The contamination was a latent defect which the Bank had no knowledge of. The purpose of the Act was not to regulate commercial transactions between private parties, but to ensure pollution was prevented or cleaned up. The plaintiff appealed.
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the ground that the Bank was neither an "owner of the pollutant" nor the "person having control of the pollutant" for the purposes of s. 13(3) of the Act, as those phrases were defined in ss. 2(r) and 2(t) of the Act.
Pollution Control - Topic 9318
Enforcement - General - Liability for compensation by owner or person controlling pollutant - Section 13(3) of the Environmental Management and Protection Act entitled any person suffering loss or damage as a result of discharge of a pollutant to compensation from the "owner" or "person having control" of the pollutant - The plaintiff purchased foreclosed commercial property from the Federal Business Development Bank in 1989, intending to run it for several years then sell it at a profit - Unknown to anyone, the property was contaminated by an continual underground fuel leak which commenced in 1980 - The plaintiff sold the property for less profit than expected and claimed compensation from the Bank under s. 13(3) - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal of the action on the ground that the Bank was not an "owner" or "person in control" of the pollutant for the purposes of s. 13(3), as defined in ss. 2(r) and 2(t) of the Act - The Bank was not a "successor" or "assignee" to the sole statutory "owner" (s. 2(r)), nor did the Bank have "control" over the pollutant.
Sale of Land - Topic 8631
Remedies of purchaser - For quality defects - Latent defects - The plaintiff purchased foreclosed commercial property from the Federal Business Development Bank, intending to run it for several years then sell it at a profit - Unknown to anyone, the property was contaminated by an underground fuel leak, which had to be cleaned up under the Environmental Maintenance and Protection Act - The plaintiff, after unsuccessful efforts to clean up the contamination, wanted to rescind the contract or receive damages under s. 13(3) of the Act as compensation - The Bank declined and cleaned up the property itself at a cost of $65,000 - The plaintiff sold the property, not realizing the profit it expected - The plaintiff sued for damages in excess of $200,000, claiming the Bank was liable for selling it contaminated property -The trial judge dismissed the action - The contamination was a latent defect which the Bank had no knowledge of - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal of the action, but on the ground that the Bank was neither an "owner of the pollutant" nor the "person having control of the pollutant" for the purposes of s. 13(3) of the Act, as those phrases were defined in ss. 2(r) and 2(t) of the Act.
Cases Noticed:
Lensen v. Lensen, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 672; 79 N.R. 334; 64 Sask.R. 6, refd to. [para. 21].
National Trust Co. v. Mead, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 410; 112 N.R. 1; 87 Sask.R. 161, refd to. [para. 41].
Wentworth (County) v. Hamilton Radial Electric Railway Co. et al. (1917), 54 S.C.R. 178, refd to. [para. 43].
New Brunswick Telephone Co. v. John Maryon International Ltd. et al. (1983), 43 N.B.R.(2d) 469; 113 A.P.R. 469; 141 D.L.R.(3d) 193 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 67].
Central Trust Co. v. Rafuse and Cordon, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 147; 69 N.R. 321; 75 N.S.R.(2d) 109; 186 A.P.R. 109, refd to. [para. 68].
Toffoli v. Rozenhart (1992), 1 Alta. L.R.(3d) 104 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 69].
Statutes Noticed:
Court of Appeal Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. C-42, sect. 8 [para. 22].
Environmental Management and Protection Act, S.S. 1983-84, c. E-10.2, sect. 2(r), sect. 2(t) [para. 20]; sect. 13(1), sect. 13(2) [para. 61]; sect. 13(3)(a)(i), sect. 13(4) [para. 1]; sect. 13(5), sect. 13(6), sect. 13(7), sect. 13(8) [para. 60].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Black's Law Dictionary (6th Ed. 1990) [para. 41].
Côté, Pierre-André, The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada, p. 207 [para. 62].
Webster's Third New International Dictionary (1971) [para. 41].
West's Legal Thesaurus/Dictionary (1985) [para. 41].
Counsel:
K. Stevenson, Q.C., for the appellant;
K. Prisciak, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard on January 22, 1998, before Bayda, C.J.S., Vancise and Wakeling, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.
On December 1, 1998, the judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered and the following opinions were filed:
Bayda, C.J.S. (Vancise, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 50;
Wakeling, J.A. - see paragraphs 51 to 72.
To continue reading
Request your trialUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Table of Cases
...SCC 38 .........................114, 212, 217– 18 Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 168 D.L.R. (4th) 27, 172 Sask. R. 133, [1998] S.J. No. 786 (C.A.) ............... 225 C.U.P.E. Local 30 v. WMI Waste Management of Canada Inc. (1996), 34 Admin. L.R. (2d) 172 (Alt......
-
Table of cases
...315 Busse Farms Ltd v Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 168 DLR (4th) 27, 172 Sask R 133, [1998] SJ No 786 (CA) ......................... 232 Calvé v Gestion Serge Lafrenière inc, [1999] RJQ 1313, [1999] JQ no 1334 (CA) .....................................................................
-
Table of Cases
...1110, 2012 FC 1024 .................................... 311 Busse Farms Ltd v Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 168 DLR (4th) 27, 172 Sask R 133, [1998] SJ No 786 (CA) ......................... 229 CUPE Local 30 v WMI Waste Management of Canada Inc (1996), 34 Admin LR (2d) 172 (Alta......
-
Chisum Log Homes & Lumber Ltd. et al. v. Investment Saskatchewan Inc. et al., 2007 SKQB 368
...Tweddle v. Atkinson (1861), 1 B. & S. 393 (K.B.), refd to. [para. 37]. Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 172 Sask.R. 133; 185 W.A.C. 133 (C.A.), refd to. [para. National Trust Co. v. Mead, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 410; 112 N.R. 1; 87 Sask.R. 161, refd to. [para. 41]. ......
-
Chisum Log Homes & Lumber Ltd. et al. v. Investment Saskatchewan Inc. et al., 2007 SKQB 368
...Tweddle v. Atkinson (1861), 1 B. & S. 393 (K.B.), refd to. [para. 37]. Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 172 Sask.R. 133; 185 W.A.C. 133 (C.A.), refd to. [para. National Trust Co. v. Mead, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 410; 112 N.R. 1; 87 Sask.R. 161, refd to. [para. 41]. ......
-
Workshop Holdings Ltd. v. CAE Machinery Ltd., 2003 BCCA 56
...W.A.C. 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 54]. Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank (1996), 150 Sask.R. 305 (Q.B.), affd. (1998), 172 Sask.R. 133; 185 W.A.C. 133 (C.A.), leave to appeal dismissed (1999), 249 N.R. 196; 203 Sask.R. 109; 240 W.A.C. 109 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. Statute......
-
Director of Labour Standards (Sask.) v. DJB Transportation Services Inc. et al., 2010 SKCA 50
...Council (1985), 40 Sask.R. 183 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33]. Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank, [1999] 7 W.W.R. 737; 172 Sask.R. 133; 185 W.A.C. 133 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Sikorski et al. v. Tri-Hospital Patient Transport and Courier Ltd. (1995), 136 Sask.R. 61 (Q.B.), r......
-
Edmonton (City) v. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. et al., (2008) 441 A.R. 228 (QB)
...(2004), 357 A.R. 139; 334 W.A.C. 139; 2004 ABCA 309 (C.A.), dist. [para. 39]. Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 172 Sask.R. 133; 185 W.A.C. 133 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48]. Holtby's Design Service Inc. v. Campbell Chevrolet Oldsmobile Inc., [2004] O.J. No. 183 (C......
-
Table of Cases
...SCC 38 .........................114, 212, 217– 18 Busse Farms Ltd. v. Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 168 D.L.R. (4th) 27, 172 Sask. R. 133, [1998] S.J. No. 786 (C.A.) ............... 225 C.U.P.E. Local 30 v. WMI Waste Management of Canada Inc. (1996), 34 Admin. L.R. (2d) 172 (Alt......
-
Table of cases
...315 Busse Farms Ltd v Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 168 DLR (4th) 27, 172 Sask R 133, [1998] SJ No 786 (CA) ......................... 232 Calvé v Gestion Serge Lafrenière inc, [1999] RJQ 1313, [1999] JQ no 1334 (CA) .....................................................................
-
Table of Cases
...1110, 2012 FC 1024 .................................... 311 Busse Farms Ltd v Federal Business Development Bank (1998), 168 DLR (4th) 27, 172 Sask R 133, [1998] SJ No 786 (CA) ......................... 229 CUPE Local 30 v WMI Waste Management of Canada Inc (1996), 34 Admin LR (2d) 172 (Alta......
-
Financing environmental change: a new role for Canadian environmental law.
...Business Development Bank (1996), [1997] 5 W.W.R. 34, 150 Sask. R. 305 (Q.B.), aff'd (1998) 168 D.L.R. (4th) 27, [1999] 7 W.W.R. 737, 172 Sask. R. 133 (C.A.), leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused [1999] 3 S.C.R. vi [Busse Farms]. See also Jimmy Y. Levy, "Landlord and Lender Liability for Hazar......