Alberta’s Land and Property Rights Tribunal has dismissed a Rocky View County man’s bid to reopen a damages claim against AltaLink.
The Tribunal said Vern Bretin had no legal right to the land when the alleged tree removal occurred in 2014, and therefore no standing to seek compensation under Alberta’s Surface Rights Act.
"The Applicant has not established any of the basic requirements for review," the Tribunal wrote in its decision, released March 25.
Bretin filed the claim in 2015, alleging AltaLink removed trees from a triangular section of land near his property during power line work in 2014. The site—about 300 square metres and referred to in the decision as the "Adverse Lands"—was not registered in his name at the time. He later gained possession through a 2019 adverse possession ruling by the Court of King’s Bench.
"The Operator entered upon and removed trees that were part of the land that I am an occupant of and in possession of,” Bretin wrote in his 2015 filing. “The wood was removed... such that it was not available for me to use to heat my home."
The Tribunal found that while Bretin held a right of entry order for a separate parcel—the "Bretin Lands"—that order did not apply to the Adverse Lands. That land was covered by a 1997 Right-of-Way Agreement between TransAlta Utilities Corporation and the registered owners, Donald Ross and Christine McKinnon. AltaLink acquired the agreement in 2002.
"The Applicant is an owner of the adjacent Bretin Lands which are covered by Right of Entry Order No. 0308/2014, but that does not entitle him to claim damages for lands he claims occupancy of, when those lands are under a different right of entry instrument... of which he is not a party," the Tribunal wrote.
The panel found that AltaLink’s access to the Adverse Lands was authorized under that earlier agreement. Although Bretin registered a caveat in 2015 claiming adverse possession, the Tribunal said that claim did not apply retroactively.
"Title is acquired at the point a ruling of finding of adverse possession is made. It does not operate retroactively," the decision stated.
In seeking review of a 2023 decision that dismissed his claim, Bretin filed a 31-page brief alleging errors of fact, law and process. He argued the Tribunal had overlooked a 2015 email responding to a request for documentation and failed to consider his status as an occupant.
The Tribunal acknowledged the email had not been included in the hearing record but said the omission had no impact on the outcome.
"The Original Panel correctly determined that the Applicant could not provide a copy of the surface lease and plan for the Adverse Lands... because one did not exist," it wrote.
The panel also said it was permitted to proceed without further submissions under Rule 23(1) of the Surface Rights Rules, citing the matter’s nine-year history.
"The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hold proceedings except where the dispute is between an operator and an owner or occupant who were parties to a surface lease or right of entry order," it stated.
The Tribunal dismissed the application and awarded no costs. AltaLink did not participate in the review.
Sign up to get the latest local news headlines delivered directly to your inbox every afternoon.
Send your news tips, story ideas, pictures, and videos to news@discoverairdrie.com. You can also message and follow us on Twitter: @AIR1061FM.
DiscoverAirdrie encourages you to get your news directly from your trusted source by bookmarking this page and downloading the DiscoverAirdrie app.