Judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada

 
Citation:City of Brossard v. Pelletier, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 53
Date:February 5, 1986
Docket: 18304
Other formats: PDF WPD
Printer Friendly

City of Brossard v. Pelletier, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 53

 

City of Brossard         Appellant;

 

and

 

Louis Pelletier              Respondent.

 

File No.: 18304.

 

1986: February 5.

 

Present: Beetz, Chouinard, Lamer, Le Dain and La Forest JJ.

 

on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec

 

                  Appeal ‑‑ Expropriation ‑‑ Right of the expropriating party to appeal from an order of the Expropriation Tribunal fixing the final indemnity to be paid to the lessee of an expropriated immoveable.

 

Statutes and Regulations Cited

 

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 15.

 

                  APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal, [1983] C.A. 475, [1983] R.D.J. 502, allowing respondent's motion for the dismissal of appellant's appeal from an order of the Expropriation Tribunal, [1983] T.E. 61 (sub nom. Ville de Brossard c. Parc des maisons mobiles Le domaine Camflo Inc.), fixing the final indemnity to be paid to respondent. Appeal allowed.

 

                  Clermont Vermette, Q.C., and Réjean Rioux, for the appellant.

 

                  J. L. Guilbeault, Q.C., for the respondent.

 

                  English version of the judgment of the Court delivered orally by

 

1.               Beetz J.‑‑ We are all of the opinion that this appeal should be allowed.

 

2.               We adopt the reasoning of Mayrand J. without expressing, however, any opinion on s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms had that section been in force at the time.

 

3.               The judgment of the Court of Appeal, dated November 22, 1983, is set aside and the motion to dismiss the appeal is disallowed, the whole with costs both here and in the Court of Appeal.

 

                  Judgment accordingly.

 

                  Solicitors for the appellant: Vermette, Dunton, De Wever, Caron, Rainville & Toupin, Montréal.

 

                  Solicitors for the respondent: Villeneuve, Pigeon, Clément, Guilbeault, Laurendeau & Herbert, Montréal.