Canada: The Canada Line Cases: Compensation For The Impacts Of Public Projects

Last Updated: September 20 2018
Article by Laura Morrison

The British Columbia Supreme Court recently released a decision, Gautam v. Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc., 2018 BCSC 1515 ("Gautam"), awarding compensation to three businesses that were impacted by the construction of the Canada Line on Cambie Street in Vancouver. This case was a test case as part of a larger class action by Cambie Street businesses.

The Gautam decision is important not only because it sets the framework for the resolution of the claims of other businesses in the class action, but also because it expands the potential for claims by businesses impacted by the construction of other public infrastructure projects.

An earlier decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, Susan Heyes Inc. (Hazel & Co.) v. South Coast B.C. Transportation Authority, 2011 BCCA 77 ("Susan Heyes"), also involved a claim by a business for losses suffered as a result of the Canada Line construction. However, the Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff in Susan Heyes was not entitled to damages.

Why were the plaintiffs in Gautam successful while the plaintiff in Susan Heyes was not? The reason is that the two cases involved different, but related, causes of action.

The Susan Heyes decision: nuisance and statutory authority

The plaintiff in Susan Heyes based its claim in nuisance. A nuisance is an unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of land. While the Court accepted that a nuisance had occurred, the defendant, South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority (known as TransLink) succeeded in establishing the defence of statutory authority. This defence applies when (Susan Heyes at para. 79):

  1. The act causing the nuisance was expressly or implicitly authorized by statute; and
  2. The nuisance was the inevitable result of the statutorily authorized action.

The Court of Appeal held that the construction caused a nuisance and that Translink had statutory authority for the project. The case turned on whether the nuisance was the inevitable result of the project. The question was "whether there was a practically feasible option to cut and cover construction that would not have created a nuisance, given the scientific possibilities, the financial picture, and other relevant circumstances, viewed from a common sense perspective" (Susan Heyes at para. 119). The Court of Appeal held that the other possible method of construction, bored tunnel construction, was not practically feasible because it required more public funding than was available and had other practical disadvantages. The Court of Appeal found that Translink established both that cut and cover construction was the only practically feasible method and that it was practically impossible to avoid a nuisance using that method (Susan Heyes at para. 134). Therefore the nuisance was inevitable and the plaintiff in Susan Heyes was not entitled to compensation.

The Gautam decision: injurious affection and business losses

Rather than nuisance, the plaintiffs in Gautam based their claim on injurious affection, which does not seem to have been raised in Susan Heyes. Injurious affection is a relatively obscure cause of action that arose out of the construction of railways in 19th century England and was adopted into British Columbia law through the Expropriation Act. The Court in Gautam described injurious affection as a "consolation prize" that applies when a nuisance claim cannot succeed because of the defence of statutory authority.

The test for injurious affection is:

  1. The damage must result from an act rendered lawful by statutory powers of the person performing such act (in other words, the damage was caused by a project that requires statutory authority and the proponent has that authority);
  2. The damage must be such as would have been actionable under the common law, but for the statutory powers (in other words, the impact would have been a nuisance except that the defence of statutory authority applies);
  3. The damage must be an injury to the land itself and not a personal injury or an injury to business or trade;
  4. The damage must be occasioned by the construction of the public work, not by its user (ongoing use).

In contrast to nuisance, it is not a defence to injurious affection that Translink chose the only practically feasible method of construction and that the nuisance was inevitable.

Under the third part of the test, injurious affection is available only to compensate an injury to the land itself, not a business loss. The plaintiffs in Gautam are lessees who operated businesses that suffered losses as a result of the Canada Line construction. If the injurious affection test had been applied in the traditional manner, they probably would not have been entitled to any compensation.

Nevertheless, the plaintiffs were able to successfully argue that they had suffered an injury to land that was compensable. The logic was that their leasehold interests were worth less during the construction than they otherwise would have been. As a result, the plaintiffs were overpaying rent during the construction. The Court held that their damages were the difference between what they actually paid in rent and what market rent should have been during the construction. The value of market rent during construction was calculated by reducing the rent that the plaintiffs actually paid by the percentage by which the plaintiffs' profits were reduced during construction, with adjustments for contingencies.

In a circuitous fashion, the plaintiffs in Gautam were effectively awarded compensation that was calculated based on their business losses. The Court had to recharacterize those losses as an injury to land so that the injurious affection test could be met.

The Gautam decision: limitation period

Another significant aspect of the Gautam decision is the Court's finding that the plaintiffs' claims were not barred by the one year limitation period in the Expropriation Act. Most of the damages suffered by the plaintiffs had occurred more than one year prior to the commencement of the action.

Ordinarily, if a nuisance is ongoing, a new cause of action is considered to arise every day. A new limitation period begins every day for the damages that were suffered on that day. Once an action has been commenced, the limitation period works back in time and prevents the plaintiff from recovering for any damages that occurred more than the relevant period before the commencement of the action. Since nuisance and injurious affection are closely related, it is arguable that the Court in Gautam should have applied this principle. If so, the plaintiffs in Gautam would have been limited to claiming damages that occurred within one year before they filed their claim.

On the contrary, the Court held that no limitation period began to run until the completion of the construction. Because the action was commenced within one year of completion, the plaintiffs were entitled to claim damages that arose during the entire course of the construction. The rationale was that the impact of the construction only became unreasonable (and therefore actionable) because of the length of time over which it occurred. This result is surprising and may affect the application of limitation periods in future cases involving continuing damages.

Consequences of Gautam

The British Columbia Expropriation Act does not say what kinds of damages are compensable for injurious affection. This makes it necessary to rely on the common law, which does not allow for compensation for business losses for injurious affection. However, the Court in Gautam found a way to award compensation that was calculated based on the plaintiffs' business losses. This result does not fit easily with the established common law. The Court's reasoning is somewhat convoluted and it is unclear how it will be applied in future cases. It is possible that it will be the subject of an appeal.

By reinterpreting the law of injurious affection, Gautam may expand the potential for claims by businesses that are impacted by the construction of public infrastructure projects. Both the Susan Heyes and Gautam cases raise the broader public policy question of who should be responsible for the external impacts associated with infrastructure projects.

It is arguable that this question should be decided by the legislature, not the courts. In Ontario, for instance, the Expropriations Act clearly defines injurious affection and includes compensation for business losses. Likewise, the British Columbia Expropriation Act could be amended to set out explicitly whether business losses are compensable or not. This clarity would assist both project proponents and business owners in planning their affairs. Gautam, on the other hand, confuses the issue.

The Canada Line Cases: Compensation For The Impacts Of Public Projects

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

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions