The Wrong of Constructive Expropriation
Abstract
This article discusses the cause of action of constructive expropriation recently restated in Annapolis Group Inc. v. Halifax Regional Municipality. It argues that this cause of action came into existence through a series of Supreme Court of Canada decisions that deviated from principle, precedent, and respect for legislative supremacy, culminating vividly in Annapolis itself. The result, it argues, is a common law chimera — a cause of action that seems unique in private law. This raises a puzzle: taxonomically, what is constructive expropriation in law? This article argues that constructive expropriation is best seen as a tort, even though it sits uneasily beside its more established tort brethren. Framing the post- Annapolis constructive expropriation cause of action as a tort reveals the incoherencies between constructive expropriation and other doctrines of private law. Drawing on the jurisprudential history of constructive expropriation before the Supreme Court, this article argues that the courts are ill-equipped to make constructive expropriation more coherent on their own. It therefore argues that legislative intervention is warranted, either to restructure the cause of action or to abolish it altogether.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
For Editions following and including Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
For Editions prior to Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.
Author(s) retain original copyright in the substantive content of the titled work, subject to the following rights that are granted indefinitely:
- Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to produce, publish, disseminate, and distribute the titled work in electronic format to online database services, including, but not limited to: LexisNexis, QuickLaw, HeinOnline, and EBSCO;
- Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to post the titled work on the Alberta Law Review website and/or related websites.
- Author(s) agree that the titled work may be used for educational or instructional purposes and/or in educational or instructional materials. The author(s) acknowledge that the titled work is subject to other such "fair dealing" provisions and applicable legislation.
- Author(s) grant a limited license to those accessing the titled work from an electronic database or an Alberta Law Review website to download the titled work onto their computer and to print a copy for their own personal, non-commercial use, subject to proper attribution.
To use the journal's content elsewhere, permission must be obtained from the author(s) and the Alberta Law Review.