Jarry v. Ministre du Revenu National

Procureurs de l'appelant: Lemay, Martel, Poulin & Corbeil, Montreal.

Procureur de l'intimg: E. S. McLatchy, Ottawa. Fauteux J.

METCALFE TELEPHONES LIMITED

. APPELLANT; *Nov. 26

Dec. 16

AND

WALTER J. McKENNA AND THE

BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY

RESPONDENTS. OF CANADA................

ON APPEAL FROM THE BOARD OF TRANSPORT

COMMISSIONERS FOR CANADA

Public utilities-Telephone company-Order by Transport Board to provide service-Area not served by Bell Telephone Company-Absence of jurisdiction-An act respecting the Bell Telephone Company of Canada, 1902 (Can.), c. 41, s. 2-The Railway Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 284, s. The respondent lived on the south side of a road served by the appellant company. The Bell Telephone Company served the north side of that road. The respondent was granted an order by the Transport Board directing the Bell Telephone Company to provide him with telephone service. The appellant was granted leave to appeal to this Court. Held: The appeal should be allowed and the order of the Board set aside. Under s. 2 of An Act respecting the Bell Telephone Company of Canada, 1902 (Can.), c. 41, the Transport Board could require the Bell Telephone Company to serve all persons within a territory "within which it gave a general service". It was not intended that it could impose a requirement upon the Bell Telephone Company to extend its services into new areas or to enter a territory already served by another telephone company. The evidence in this case disclosed that the general service provided in that territory in which the respondent lived, was provided by the appellant. Consequently, the respondent did not come within the section of the Act and the Transport Board was without jurisdiction to make the order.

APPEAL by leave from an order of the Transport Board. Appeal allowed.

Taschereau CJ. and Abbott, Judson, Ritchie and Spence JJ. R.C.S.