In re Court

A

N *Oct.22.

(PLAINTIFF)....

..............

*Nov. 26.

AND

LAND SETTLEMENT BOARD (DEFEND- LR

ANT).............

ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA

Defendant, the body incorporated by the British Columbia Land Settlement and Development Act, took proceedings under ss. 46-55 of the Act (R.S.B.C., 1924, c. 128) with respect to lands of which plaintiff was the registered owner, and penalty taxes provided for by s. 53 were imposed. Plaintiff sued defendant, attacking said legislation as ultra vires, as providing for indirect taxation, and claimed damages, an injunction, etc.

Held that, as the notice which defendant had given under s. 53 contained no reference to appraisal of "interests" in land or of any interest separate from that of the owner, and said nothing as to persons claiming any estate or interest in the land, or any charge or encumbrance thereon, and as no taxes, charges, etc., other than those imposed upon the land itself, were notified to the owner, and there was nothing in the notice to indicate or suggest any intention or project to impose a tax upon any person, other than the owner, having any estate or interest in the land, the taxation effected could not, on giving the proper interpretation and effect to the provisions of ss. 51 and 53 of the Act, extend beyond the land and the owner thereof; and that the taxation effected upon the land and the owner was direct, and intra vires of the legislature.

City of Halifax v. Fairbanks, [19281 A.C. 117, at pp. 124-126, cited and applied.

Att. Gen. of Manitoba v. Att. Gen. of Canada [19251 A.C. 561, distinguished, having regard to the nature of the statutory provisions in question. In the present case, while the statute provides imperatively for the appraisal of the land, and for the taxation of the land and of the owner, it is left to the Board's discretion (except where the fee is still in the Crown) to appraise interests other than that of the owner; and no taxation is intended, or can be effected, of any estate or interest which is not appraised and described in the notice issued by the Board, by means of which notice the taxation is effected; the legislature itself has, therefore, plainly provided for the " partition " which was lacking in the Manitoba case, by confiding a discretion to the Board to tax or not to tax persons, other than the owner, claiming *PRESENT:-Anglin CJ.C. and Mignault, Newcombe, Rinfret and Lamont JJ.