Thomson Lumber and Building Materials Ltd. and Bayford Holdings Ltd. v. Toronto Area Transit Operating Authority, (1984) 6 O.A.C. 43 (DC)

• Judge: Galligan, Labrosse and O'Brien, JJ.
• Court: Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
• Case Date: September 24, 1984
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1984), 6 O.A.C. 43 (DC)

Thomson Lumber v. Toronto Transit (1984), 6 O.A.C. 43 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

Thomson Lumber and Building Materials Limited and Bayford Holdings Limited v. Toronto Area Transit Operating Authority

Indexed As: Thomson Lumber and Building Materials Ltd. and Bayford Holdings Ltd. v. Toronto Area Transit Operating Authority

Ontario Divisional Court

Galligan, Labrosse and O'Brien, JJ.

September 24, 1984.

Summary:

The Land Compensation Board determined the compensation payable to Thomson Lumber and Bayford Holdings for the expropriation of certain lands. The expropriating authority appealed pursuant to s. 33 of the Expropriations Act.

The Ontario Divisional Court dismissed the appeal.

Administrative Law - Topic 8928

Boards and tribunals - Powers - Statutory powers of decision - Limitations - The Ontario Divisional Court held that unless expressly prohibited by statute, a tribunal has the right to accept an agreement between the parties as to part, some or all of the issues which it has to decide - See paragraph 12.

Expropriation - Topic 1075

Measure of compensation - Evidence of value - Agreements between parties - The Ontario Divisional Court held that a statutory authority had authority under s. 24 of the Expropriations Act to make a partial agreement with the owner respecting the value of the expropriated land, and that the Land Compensation Board could determine compensation under s. 30(1) based on the partial agreement - See paragraphs 8 to 11.

Expropriation - Topic 2207

Practice and procedure - Appeals - Scope of review by courts of decisions of boards - The Ontario Divisional Court held that the court should not interfere with the decisions of the Land Compensation Board if there is evidence which, if accepted, would justify its finding - See paragraphs 18 to 20.

Cases Noticed:

King v. Hooper, [1943] 1 D.L.R. 279, dist. [para. 12].

Statutes Noticed:

Expropriations Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 148, sect. 24 [paras. 8-9]; sect. 30(1) [paras. 8-10].

Counsel:

J.F. McCallum, Q.C., and T.W. Bermingham, for the appellant;

M.J. McQuaid, Q.C., and C.J. Tzekas, for the respondent, Thomson Lumber;

R.R. Elliott, for the respondent Bayford Holdings.

This appeal was heard before Galligan, Labrosse and O'Brien, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court on September 12-13, 1984. The decision of the Divisional Court was delivered orally by Labrosse, J., and released on September 24, 1984.