You probably already know our Toronto friend and colleague Shane Rayman. He's the lawyer responsible for the fascinating Supreme Court (Canada, naturally) decision in Antrim Truck Centre, wherein the Court recognized that under the Expropriation Act, Ontario had an obligation to compensate a property owner for "injurious affection" even though the highway project did not formally expropriate any part of the owner's truck stop.
Shane is also a regular guest lecturer at our William and Mary Law School Eminent Domain and Property Rights class (where he speaks on comparative property rights), and has been a faculty member at the ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference. He also recommended we visit Montreal's Mirabel Airport (a trip only a true dirt lawyer could love).
To catch up on the latest from Shane, check out this Canadian Lawyer story, "Expropriation expands with more infrastructure projects," in which he discusses the issues involved in the taking of property for Metrolinx.
Much of this will be familiar to U.S. eminent domain lawyers. But some will not. Injurious affection, for example ("any reduction in the land value of the remaining (non-expropriated) land caused by the expropriation and associated works"), disturbance damages ("damages relating to a business, including any out-of-pocket costs, business losses, relocation expenses or any consequential losses arising from the expropriation"), and "reasonable legal costs to the owner."
Check it out here.
