Respond to the questions - Essay Example

Source Evaluation I have absolute trust in this source. This is because the source is a scholarly source written by an academician. Additionally, thesource draws trusted literature, findings, and examples from other authoritative sources. The source is not biased as it seeks to reveal all the relevant information to the subject matter. The excerpts and case studies detailed in the source areas fundamental in supporting the information the source seeks to convey. Actually, since the reference matter is about legal applications, it is thus significant to use law principles and court rulings from The Court of Appeal of Alberta as seen in the source.

Additionally, the source gives comparative legal applications in other countries that manifest the actual position of Canada in the subject matter. The source relevantly portrays information relating to foreign companies in Canada. Most significantly, the source offers trusted statistics on compensation in real time. Moreover, Fraser Institute is a governmental body in Canada hence the reliability and authority of the information contained herein (Milke 19-22). Thesis Statement “The principle of compensation for the expropriation of property is well-established in Canada.

Property owners who face a threat of expropriation and thus unusable property can easily access tradi­tion, common law principles, laws that govern compensation and court rulings that reinforce these laws. Nevertheless, unlike compensation practices in other developed countries, the instituted regulatory changes in Canada that restrict the use of property rarely result in compensation for the expropriation of property” (Milke 19). Canadian practice is as it is because of various legal loopholes, poor governance, discriminative legal application, and abject ignorance of the law.

Actually, in one case, Land Compensation Board that supposed to be an independent, quasi-judicial body to settle compensation disputes awarded a complainant, Nilsson, $15,000 per acre for compensation for the expropriation of property but the provincial government refused to pay. Indeed when Nilsson went to court, consequently he was awarded $9.1 million that the government refused to pay and continued to appeal. Subsequently, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the province’s appeal thus subjecting the complainant to discriminative application of the law (Milke 20).

Indeed, the Canadian government even lies on the specific use of private land for public use. Actually, the law that applies to disputes between two private parties discriminative fails to apply where the state is concerned. In fact, foreign companies in Canada are eligible for compensation and protection in Canada than Canadian companies (Milke 21). Hence, it seeks to promote foreign investors. Significantly, Canada fares poorly in inter­national compensation comparisons due to poor governance and ineffective strategies.

If the Canadian practice was to change today, the government would lose. This is so because it has consequently abused the law in limiting compensations. Additionally, the government would lose in the restrictions to private developments with a true and a good reason. This is so because the government has used false information and thus limited compensation for the expropriation of property among the Canadian private developers. Nevertheless, the Canadian private developers and companies would win since they would comfortably develop and get the right compensation for the expropriation of property.

However, offshore investors from counterpart states who enjoy greater protection and compensation in Canada than Canadian companies stand to lose if the Canadian practice changed. Works Cited Milke, Mark. Stealth confiscation: Property takings via regulation. Fraser Institute, 2012. Web 14, May 2012. < http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/rContent/esearch-news/research/articles/stealth-confiscation-property-takings-via-regulations-ff.pdf>