Abstract

This essay, through exploring the evolution of de facto expropriation in Canada, argues that the Supreme Court of Canada has recently “reformulated” the test for de facto expropriation by inaccurately representing what its own prior cases stated. The Supreme Court asserted that no more than an “advantage” has to be acquired by the state, not an interest in property. After analyzing the Supreme Court’s prior precedents, the article contrasts them with what the Supreme Court said they stood for in its most recent case, Annapolis Group v. Halifax Regional Municipality.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.