252 EXCHEQUER COURT REPORTS. [VOL XI. IN THE MATTER of the Petition of Right of 1908 FLORA LEFRANÇOIS . SUPPLIANT ; Jan. 7. AND HIS MAJESTY THE KING RESPONDENT. Negligence—Government railway—Public work—E f fect of Government acquiring running rights and powers over another railway and operating it as part of Intercolonial Railway. The suppliant's husband was mortally injured while employed as a loco- • motive fireman on an Intercolonial Railway train, runnin g between Levis and Chaudiere, at a point on the Grand Trunk Railway enclosed between two sections of the Intercolonial Railway over which the Government of Canada had acquired running rig hts and powers in perpetuity and free of charge under 43 Vic. c. 8. Over this section of railway the Government operated its trains and locomotives as on a part of the Intercolonial Railway system. Held, that the place where the accident happened might properly be taken as au extension of the Intercolonial Railway, and therefore was to be regarded as a public work within the meaning of section 20 c. of R. 5. 1906, c. 140. LOTION to dismiss petition of right on points of law raised in defence. December 2nd, 1907. The argument of the motion now took place. E. L. Newcombe, K. C, in support of the motion ; C. Lane, contra. THE JUDGE OP THE EXCHEQUER COURT now (January 7th, 1908) delivered judgment. The petition is brought by Flora Lefrançois for damages for the death of her husband, in his lifetime a locomotive fireman, who was mortally injured while running on an Intercolonial Railway train between Levis and Chaudiere, at a point on the Grand Trunk Railway enclosed between
VOL. XI.]' EXCHEQUER COURT REPORTS. 253 two sections ofthe Intercolonial Railway where theGovern-1908 ment of Canada bas acquired running rights and powers LEF RA çoIs in perpetuity and free of charge under 43 Vic., chap. 8; THZ mira. and over which the Government of Canada runs its trains Reasons for Judgment. and locomotives as on a part of the Intercolonial Rail way system. It is admitted that the. Intercolonial Railway is a public work of . Canada, but it is argued that the place where the accident happened was not a part of a public work of Canada, and therefore the suppliant has no right of action under the statute (R.S.C., 1906, Cap. 140, s. 20, clause (c)). That contention raises, I think, the question as to whether or not the part of the Grand Trunk Railway over which the Government has running powers may with propriety be considered an extension of the Intercolonial Railway as defined in the 80th section of The Government Railways Act (R.S.C. 1906, Cap. 36 s. 80), which is in these terms :.—" All railways and all branches and extensions thereof and ferries in connection therewith vested in His Majesty, under the control and management of the Minister and situated in the Provinces of Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, are hereby declared to constitute and form the Intercolonial Railway." In my view 1 think that the place where the accident happened may properly be taken to le an extension of the Intercolonial, Railway. I am, therefore, of opinion that the accident complained of happened on a public work, and that the question ôf la* raised should be determined against the respondent and in favour of the suppliant. Motion refused.* * REPORTER'S NOTE :—Affirmed on appeal to Supreme Court of Canada, 40 S. C. R. 431. 18
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.