3 total
Transfer of expropriated land for economic development did not confer an unlawful municipal bonus.
Two related actions challenged a municipality’s expropriation of commercial land that formed part of a 1,000‑acre assembly for a vehicle manufacturing plant.
The plaintiffs argued that the municipality unlawfully expropriated the property and conferred an illegal “bonus” on a private manufacturer by transferring the land at the expropriation price rather than its alleged fair market value, contrary to s. 106 of the Municipal Act, 2001.
The court held that the municipality had lawful authority to expropriate the land for valid public purposes related to economic development.
Applying the contextual approach to s. 106 adopted in Friends of Lansdowne Inc. v. Ottawa (City), the court concluded that the transaction did not confer an “obviously undue advantage” on the private enterprise.
Accordingly, the expropriation and subsequent transfer did not breach the statutory prohibition on municipal bonuses.
Appeal of eviction order dismissed as appellant had no legal right to occupy the property.
The appellant appealed an order requiring him to vacate the respondent's property, where he had been living and working without legal right.
The trial judge had granted a grace period for the appellant to remove his personal property, which he failed to do.
The appellant argued his property and Charter rights were breached.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error by the trial judge and noting the appellant's problems were of his own making.
Costs of $5,000 were awarded to the respondent.
Appeal from summary judgment dismissing the action is dismissed.
The appellant appealed a decision of the motion judge granting summary judgment and dismissing the action.
The Court of Appeal found no error in the motion judge's decision and dismissed the appeal, awarding costs to the respondent in the amount of $6,000.
