The City of Calgary has identified portions or all of several
dozen residential and commercial properties it may need to
expropriate along the planned route of the Green Line Southeast
LRT. Councillors debated the potential acquisition of those
properties during the confidential portion of the Land and Asset
Strategy Committee meeting on Thursday, January 28.
Each stakeholder (ownership or leasehold interests) that
receives a Notice of Intention to Expropriate from the City has
rights under the Expropriation Act, and may be
entitled to more compensation than is offered by the City.
Stakeholders faced with the forced taking of their interest by the
City are cost-protected under the Act, meaning
that they can recover reasonable legal and certain other costs from
the City incurred in connection with the expropriation process.
At a high level, the expropriation process under the
Act includes an opportunity for stakeholders to
object to the taking of their interest upon receipt of a Notice of
Intention to Expropriate from the expropriating authority
(i.e., the City), in which case an inquiry
hearing will be held to determine whether the intended
expropriation is fair, sound and reasonably necessary in the
achievement of the objectives of the expropriating authority. If
the expropriation is approved following such an inquiry hearing,
the expropriating authority will serve a Notice of Expropriation on
the impacted stakeholders followed by a written notification
setting out the amount of compensation it estimates to be
appropriate for the property in question.
When a stakeholder and the expropriating authority do not agree
on the compensation payable under the Act for the
expropriation, either party can initiate proceedings before the
Land Compensation Board to determine the appropriate amount of
compensation based on the various heads of compensation provided
for in the Act.
The Regulatory and Environmental Group at Bennett Jones LLP has
extensive experience with expropriation and compensation
proceedings under the Act, most recently
assisting stakeholders impacted by the City of Calgary's West
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Russell v. Township of Georgian Bay provides a useful reminder of the fact that while municipal officials sometimes appear to hold all of the cards in disputes with home owners, that is not always the case.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).