The law reports Volume 9

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1884 edition. Excerpt: ... Eq. 252. (2) Law Rep. 3 Ch. ore. VOL. IX. 3 2 L strictly following its provisions, gave a notice in writing " stating" in such notice the nature of his interest in such lands in respect of which he claims compensation, and the amount of compensation so claimed," and required the company to issue their warrant, and then, after the lapse of twenty-one days sought by action in one of the superior Courts to recover the amount of compensation so claimed, could it be a good plea that the period prescribed for exercising their statutable powers for making and completing the railway had expired? I think it could not, even if the intention of the legislature appearing on the statute had been plain that the warrants for summoning juries were in general to be within a specified period, which is not the case. I should doubt whether the incapacity of the company, brought about by their own delay, to comply with the condition of issuing the warrant would be any defence. It would be quite different if it could be shewn that the delay was brought about by the default of the plaintiff. This remedy, which if I am right is a very efiicient one, could only be used by a landowner who is willing to give up his land. But if the landowner is desirous, as in this case he is, for any reason to keep his land, the question seems to me different. The company can only claim to keep the land, before they have bought it, by virtue of the statutable power given by sect. 85. It is necessary I think to decide whether the power to use the land on which the company have entered is a power granted to the company for the purpose of making and completing the railways, and so ceased to be capable of being exercised on the 19th of July 1880; and I think it is...