Marian v. Alberta, 2001 ABQB 19

• Judge: Veit, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: January 11, 2001
• Citations: 2001 ABQB 19;(2001), 294 A.R. 318 (QB)

Marian v. Alta. (2001), 294 A.R. 318 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] A.R. TBEd. AP.147

Bill Marian and Victoria Marian (plaintiffs) v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta (defendant)

(Action No. 9603 10210; 2001 ABQB 19)

Indexed As: Marian v. Alberta

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Veit, J.

January 11, 2001.

Summary:

The Province of Alberta expropriated a strip of land adjoining Highway 60 from the Marians' residence for the purpose of twinning a highway. The parties reached an agreement regarding compensation, which included an amount of $40,800 for the market value of the land and $40,000 attributable to all "damages" arising from the expropriation. The parties also agreed that the court would determine the final total compensation owing. The Marians sought determination of whether there was further compensation due.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that compensation for the partial taking from the parent parcel, should be calculated according to the "Kerr principle of valuation". Because the strip of land adjoined the highway, it had a high commercial value. The court held that the total market value of the land at the time of expropriation was $105,375 (thereby entitling the Marians to further compensation of $64,575). The court also awarded an additional $10,000 for damages resulting from the compensation.

Expropriation - Topic 904

Measure of compensation - For partial taking - The Province of Alberta expropriated a strip of land adjoining Highway 60 from the Marians' residence for the purpose of twinning a highway - The parties agreed on compensation, including $40,800 for the market value of the land and $40,0000 attributable to all "damages" arising from the expropriation - The parties also agreed that the court would determine the final total compensation owing - The Marians sought determination of whether there was further compensation due - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that compensation for the partial taking from the parent parcel, should be calculated according to the "Kerr principle of valuation" - Because the strip of land adjoined the highway, it had a high commercial value - The court held that the total market value of the land at the time of expropriation was $105,375 (thereby entitling the Marians to further compensation of $64,575) - The court also awarded an additional $10,000 for damages resulting from the compensation.

Expropriation - Topic 1038

Measure of compensation - Methods of valuation - Market value - [See Expropriation - Topic 904 ].

Expropriation - Topic 1047

Measure of compensation - Methods of valuation - For partial taking - [See Expropriation - Topic 904 ].

Expropriation - Topic 3001

Compensation awards - Particular awards - Residential property (incl. buildings) - [See Expropriation - Topic 904 ].

Cases Noticed:

Bonaventure Sales Ltd. v. Alberta (1981), 22 L.C.R. 164 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [paras. 6, 7].

Kerr v. Alberta (1980), 29 A.R. 549; 20 L.C.R. 67 (L.C.B.), affd. (1981), 29 A.R. 541; 119 D.L.R.(3d) 386; 22 L.C.R. 179 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 6, 7].

United Management Ltd. and Genstar Corp. v. Calgary (City) (1985), 65 A.R. 161; 33 L.C.R. 262 (L.C.B.), refd to. [para. 6].

Miller v. Alberta (Minister of Transportation and Utilities) (1990), 44 L.C.R. 88 (Alta. L.C.B.), refd to. [para. 6].

Lorenz v. Lloydminster (City) (1982), 40 A.R. 148; 26 L.C.R. 157 (L.C.B.), refd to. [para. 6].

Jacobsen v. R. (1979), 17 L.C.R. 149 (L.C.B.), refd to. [para. 6].

Regehr v. Alberta (1988), 39 L.C.R. 260 (Alta. L.C.B.), refd to. [para. 6].

Balgerran Farm Ltd. v. Lacombe (County) No. 14 (1993), 50 L.C.R. 26 (L.C.B.), refd to. [para. 6].

Bonaventure Sales Ltd. v. Alberta (1979), 18 A.R. 192; 17 L.C.R. 161 (L.C.B.), refd to. [para. 7].

British America Paint Co. v. Palitti (1920), 29 B.C.R. 162 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Goold v. Evans & Co., [1951] 2 The Times L.R. 1189 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Meyers v. Manitoba and Dobrowski (1960), 26 D.L.R.(2d) 550 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Kent, Sinclair and Gode (1986), 40 Man.R.(2d) 160; 27 C.C.C.(3d) 405 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Chambers v. Murphy, [1953] 2 D.L.R. 705 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Scott v. President, Councillors and Ratepayers of the Shire of Numurkah (1954), 91 C.L.R. 300 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 8].

Triple A Investments Ltd. v. Adams Brothers Ltd. (1985), 56 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 272; 168 A.P.R. 272; 23 D.L.R.(4th) 587 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Department of Labour and University of Regina, Re (1975), 62 D.L.R.(3d) 717 (Sask. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

Swadron v. North York (1985), 8 O.A.C. 204 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 8].

Paul v. Fadden, [1953] O.W.N. 306 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Cowan et al. v. Harrington, [1938] 3 D.L.R. 271 (N.B.C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Tito et al. v. Waddell et al., [1975] 3 All E.R. 997 (Ch. D.), refd to. [para. 8].

Briggs v. Morgan (1820), 2 Hag. Con. 324; 161 E.R. 758 (Ch.), refd to. [para. 8].

Eye Masters Ltd. v. London Optical Ltd. (1988), 22 C.P.R.(3d) 307 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Lewis v. Lewis, [1991] 1 W.L.R. 235 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Jordon v. J.I. Case Threshing Machine Co., [1911] 1 W.W.R. 399 (Sask. Ch.), refd to. [para. 8].

Statutes Noticed:

Expropriation Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. E-16, sect. 41 [para. 28]; sect. 42(1) [para. 39]; sect. 42(2) [paras. 28, 39]; sect. 50 [para. 39]; sect. 55 [para. 28]; sect. 56 [para. 39].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Boyd, Expropriation in Canada, A Practitioner's Guide (1988), generally [para. 7].

Counsel:

Martin K. Ignasiak (Fraser Milner Casgrain), for the plaintiffs;

Lionel Whittaker (Justice Alberta), for the defendant.

This action was heard on November 6-8, 14 and 30, 2000, by Veit, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following decision on January 11, 2001.