Finishing with the Old Regime, 1921-24

AuthorC. Ian Kyer
 was being put in place, there had been much dis cus
sion of the takeover of the Toronto Railway Company’s (TRC) transit oper
ationsinandtheaccompanyingarbitrationT heCityhadthenb eenin
the midst of a similar arbitration with t he old Toronto Street Railway Com
panyTSRandit wantedtobe surethat thearbitrationwouldbe dif
ferent. It had sought to make it clear that the franchisee would not be able
to make any claim for intangibles li kelost f uture prots or goodwill All
that the City would be required to buy from the T RC would be hard assets,
and even then, only those that were needed to operate the tran sit system
goingforward In Septemberthe Toronto Star had reminded its re ad
ersofthesefavourableconditionsthatwereexpec tedtoresultint heCity
being able to acquire the streetcar operation at a substant ial discount from
fair market value. The City intended to take fu ll advantage of these terms
— every dollar that they ended up paying to the TRC was a dollar that they
would not have available for the rebuilding of the transit system.
TheTRCwas equallycomm iedtogeing fullva lueforitsoperations
notwithstanding t hese terms. Freed of their operational responsibilities, the
arbitration was now the sole focus of TRC’s management. These divergent
controversy, starting with the number of arbitrators and the statutory regime
under which the arbitration was to be conducted. The TRC said that a single,
neutral arbitrator ought to be appointed under the Municipal Arbitration Act.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT