The Alberta Court of Appeal rejected an application for leave to appeal from a decision that found that a gas supply easement continued to apply after a lot was severed into three parts (creating two new lots). The owners of the original parcel applied to the Alberta Utilities Commission for an order directing the Evergreen Gas Co-op to discharge its easement from the newly subdivided lots. The Commission refused, and the owners sought leave to appeal the decision to the Court of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal confirmed that the easement, which was a general easement that applied to the entire original property (rather than a limited easement or ROW over a particular portion of the property), would continue to apply to any subdivided parts of the property. The Court rejected the argument by the owners that the imposition of the easement on the new parcels was nevertheless "improper" within the meaning of the Gas Distribution Act. The Court also rejected the argument that the easement "agreement" (the easement was created when the owners agreed to receive gas service from the Co-op, the terms of the contract being statutorily set) was "unconscionable" - how could the contract be unconscionable when the owners had applied for gas service and the terms of the contract were imposed by statute?
Read the decision at: Andre v Evergreen Gas Co-op Ltd.