What is the scope of a municipality's ability to expropriate land in the face of an intended expropriation?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Gemex Developments Corp. v. Coquitlam (City), 2010 BCSC 1616 (CanLII):
The powers of a municipality to expropriate land and the rights of owners in the face of an intended expropriation have been recently canvassed by this court in Dales v. Surrey (City), 2010 BCSC 1196. Several important propositions are highlighted in that case. First, the statute mandates a broad interpretation of the powers of a municipality, especially with respect to its powers to provide services. Madam Justice Fitzpatrick said, beginning at para. 15:
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the scope and scope of an order requiring blood and urine testing? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the scope and scope of section 65(1)(f) of the Rules of Civil Procedure for Divorce? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a municipality be found liable in a claim brought by a homeowner whose drain is not connected to the municipal system? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the scope and scope of the Canada-US Anti-Dodition Act? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the current state of the law with respect to the scope and scope of a document request? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the scope of the implied undertaking in the context of an implied undertaking? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a municipality be required to account for surplus funds raised through the issue of debentures? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a party intended to enter into a contract? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of a municipality's by-laws on the renewal of a policy of purchase and use of a vehicle insurance policy? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is evidence of ongoing pain sufficient to ground a substantial possibility that a plaintiff’s pain will adversely affect her future ability to work? (British Columbia, Canada)
