首页> 外文期刊>Canadian Environmental Law Reports >Nature Conservancy of Canada/Societe Canadienne Pour La Conservation De La Nature v. Waterton Land Trust Ltd.
【24h】

Nature Conservancy of Canada/Societe Canadienne Pour La Conservation De La Nature v. Waterton Land Trust Ltd.

机译:加拿大自然保护协会/加拿大自然保护协会c。沃特顿土地信托有限公司

获取原文
       

摘要

Real property - Easements - Disturbance of easements - Miscellaneous - Defendant TO bought, from plaintiff nature conservancy, large cattle ranch on which he planned to place wild bison - Plaintiff arranged for conservation easement (CE) to be registered against titles to property to ensure, inter alia, that it would not impede future wildlife migrations - TO began to replace old fences around perimeter with new fencing - Plaintiff contended that new fencing breached terms of easement, as it was higher than allowed and would impede migrating wildlife - Plaintiff brought action to enforce CE and to require modification of fences - Counterclaim was brought, raising various issues - Version of CE argued by defendant TO was enforceable one; counterclaim allowed in part - Court could rectify CE amending agreement to accord with parties' actual oral agreement, which was as TO described - Parties were ad idem to include agreed fence height restriction in CE amending agreement -Challenged document contained mistake and did not conform to parties intentions and prior oral agreement - Necessary elements were established to standard of "convincing proof for rectification of contract in case of mutual mistake - Allowing plaintiff to rely on incorrect fencing provision would unjustly enrich plaintiff-TO's new fencing did not breach fence height restriction -TO was not shown to have placed new fencing in new locations without permission - New fence was not wildlife-proof, and in fact was wildlife permeable -As to counterclaim, plaintiff did not breach obligation to interpret and enforce CE in good faith, as there was no such implied term.
机译:不动产-地役权-地役权的干扰-杂项-被告人要从原告自然保护区购买他打算放置野牛的大牧场-原告安排对保护地役权(CE)进行财产所有权登记,以确保,除其他事项外,它不会阻止未来的野生动植物迁徙-TO开始用新的围栏代替周围的旧篱笆-原告辩称新围栏违反了地役权,因为它高于允许范围,并且会阻碍野生动植物的迁徙-原告提起诉讼强制执行CE并要求修改围栏-提出反诉,引发各种问题-被告TO辩称的CE版本是可执行的;部分允许反诉-法院可以纠正CE修正协议,以符合当事方的实际口头协议-如TO所描述-当事人均应在CE修正协议中加入商定的围栏高度限制-受质疑的文件包含错误且不符合当事人的意图和事先的口头协议-已建立必要的要素,以“为在相互错误的情况下纠正合同提供有说服力的证据-允许原告依赖不正确的围栏规定会不公正地丰富原告-TO的新围栏而不会违反围栏高度限制-并未证明TO未经允许就在新的地点放置了新的栅栏-新的围栏不能抵御野生动植物,并且实际上可以渗透野生生物-关于反诉,原告没有违反诚信解释和执行CE的义务,因为在那里没有这样的隐含术语。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号