Waldron Grazing Co-operative Ltd. v. Dome Petroleum Ltd. et al., (1981) 36 A.R. 223 (QB)

• Judge: Egbert, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: January 09, 1981
• Citations: (1981), 36 A.R. 223 (QB)

Waldron Grazing v. Dome Petroleum (1981), 36 A.R. 223 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Waldron Grazing Co-operative Ltd. v. Dome Petroleum Limited: Waldron Grazing Co-operative Ltd. v. Province of Alberta and Dome Petroleum

(Nos. 8007-0118; 8007-0119)

Indexed As: Waldron Grazing Co-operative Ltd. v. Dome Petroleum Ltd. et al.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Macleod

Egbert, J.

January 9, 1981

Summary:

An oil company applied to the Surface Rights Board for entry rights over land to construct a pipeline. The Surface Rights Board issued the entry orders and granted compensation to a grazing co-op. The grazing co-op appealed on two grounds. The co-op submitted that: (1) the board erred in not granting compensation for loss of grass on an annual basis, and (2), that the compensation was inadequate for the loss of grass. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held: (1) there was no cogent evidence that the board's calculations were incorrect; and (2) there was new evidence to vary the compensation for loss of grass.

Mines and Minerals - Topic 6102

Compensation to owners of surface rights - Measure of compensation - A grazing co-op claimed compensation for loss of beef pounds because of the reduced grazing land although the co-op did not own any cattle - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the co-op's claim and stated that any loss incurred by the loss of beef will be by the shareholders and not by the company - See paragraphs 22 and 23.

Mines and Minerals - Topic 6103

Compensation to owners of surface rights - Relevant considerations - Inflation - A grazing co-op was awarded compensation for damage to its grazing lands and submitted that the effect of future inflation was not considered - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench stated that the present day value of money is the proper approach, not some undetermined speculative estimate of what today's dollar will be in the future - See paragraph 18.

Mines and Minerals - Topic 6147

Compensation to owners of surface rights - Awards - Grounds for variance of awards - The Surface Rights Board awarded compensation for loss of grass over a 20 year period after construction of a pipeline - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench stated there was sufficient new evidence to vary the awards made by the Surface Rights Board to compensate for the loss of grass - Evidence was adduced that tame grass recovered in two years but native grass required 50 years to recover after the construction of the pipeline - See paragraphs 23 to 24.

Mines and Minerals - Topic 6155

Awards for loss of surface rights - Lump sum - A grazing co- op claimed they were not granted annual compensation for loss of grass - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench stated it was the normal practice to settle claims for damages by way of a lump sum payment - The court stated the amount of the lump sum was arrived at by estimating the loss of grass over a period of years - See paragraphs 14 to 17 inclusive.

Cases Noticed:

Murphy Oil Company Ltd. v. Dau (1969), 70 W.W.R.(N.S.) 339, folld. [para. 11].

Caswell v. Alexandra Petroleums Ltd., [1972] 3 W.W.R. 706, folld. [para. 11].

Lamb v. Canadian Reserve Oil and Gas Ltd., 8 N.R. 613; [1976] 4 W.W.R. 79, folld. [para. 13].

Hanen v. Imperial Oil Enterprises Ltd. (1980), 19 A.R. 208, folld. [para. 20].

Statutes Noticed:

Surface Rights Act, R.S.A. 1972, c. 91, sect. 23(1), sect. 23(2), sect. 23(3), sect. 23(6) [para. 9]; sect. 24(8), sect. 24(10) [para. 10]; sect. 23(4) [para. 14]; sect. 24 [para. 24].

Counsel:

G.G. Dixon, for the appellants;

R.C. Swist, for the respondents.