You HAVE land rights. You just didn’t know it.

A recent media report has brought to light something called “Land grant patents”. These documents are instrumental in protecting land owners against the unlawful infringment on their ability to own, use and profit from their private property. The land grant patents are vital in the fight to control overzealous governments and their agencies for two basic reasons. The first is that they spell out in very specific terms what those rights include, and secondly it makes those rights eternal. For those of you who don’t like the monarchy, I would suggest that in this instance at least, it has done us all an unparalleled service.

During the reign of Queen Victoria, land grants where issued to immigrants to what was then Upper Canada. [ modern day Ontario ] At that time during the 1820’s and ’30’s, settlers where given the rights to the timber, the water on and in the land and the minerals that may lay within the borders of the granted land.
These rightswhere granted to to the original settler, his heirs, or to any assignors to whom the land was sold, forever. In other words, the rights stay with the property, irrespective of who holds the title. There where exceptions the crown would impose in some cases, but for the most part the land was given without reservation. Any reservations are noted on the grant, and if they are not explicitly spelled out, then no such reserve exists. The vast majority of land in Ontario is in fact “granted land” with a patent attached. There are modern day examples of cases in law and provincial legislation, where land grant patents are cited and used to defend property rights. Here is a relevant paragraph from an article out of the Midland Free Press, May 2000.

“…The first major test case of the Crown’s ownership of shoreline property was decided almost thirty years ago. In 1970, Mr. Justice Stark of the Supreme Court of Ontario, held in the trial of Walker et al v. the Attorney General (Ontario) that where one of the boundaries of the land granted by a Crown patent is to be a boundary of water, then that boundary is at the water’s edge unless the grant reserves in clear and definite words a space between the lands granted and the water boundary. Thus, Walker owned his property to the water’s edge of Lake Erie in the Township of Bertie, near Fort Erie.
The Crown appealed to the Court of Appeal for Ontario and lost, then appealed further to the Supreme Court of Canada, again without success. Thus, the trial judgement was affirmed by the Court of Appeal for Ontario in 1972 and by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1974…”

If you recall, back in 2004 the city of Toronto was looking for a new landfill and the Adams mine site near Elliot lake was given consideration. A company bought the site, did enviornmental assements and spent large sums of money to prepare for the expected use of the mine as a landfill. Then Toronto changed it’s mind, and the Elliot lake site was dropped from consideration. The province decided to compensate the firm for it’s losses but to do that, it passed legislation called the Adams lake mine act that included the stipulation that the company relinquish all rights under the land grant patent. So now we have a case decided in favour of land grant patents in the Ontario Supreme court in 1972, by the Supreme court of Canada in 1974, as well as a piece of provincial legislation requiring a firm to relinquish their rights under their grant as a condition for compensation. These two cases demonstrate the significance of the land grant patents and more importantly that the province recognizes their ability to prevent well intentioned but rights infringing legislation, bylaws or regulations from being enacted and enforced. The upshot is that should this become widely known, radical changes in the way the province does business will have to take place. This will overturn or nullify 25 to 30 pieces of legislation such as the Nutrient management act, the Spiecies at risk act, and the Clean water act. It will also effectively neuter organizations like conservation authorities as well as requiring government departments like the Ministry of Natural resources as well as the Ministry of the Environment to respect the rights of property owners as they should have done all along. The impact of this cannot be overstated, and from a landrights perspective, is the best news to ever come down the pike in the long fight to get the government to remember who is slave and who is master.

This raises the obvious question of what can people do to assist in forcing the state to adjust [ a very modest word I admit ] it’s practices and procedures in how it deals with land owners? The answer is remarkably simple. If you own a piece of land anywhere within the province of Ontario, in the country or withini city limits, you need to do two things. First, join your nearest landowners association, and second obtain your land grant patent from the Ministry of Natural resources land grant registry in Peterborough. You will need to know the name of the township at the time the grant was issued as well as the lot and concession within that township. The fee for aquiring the land grant patent will range between $50.00 to 200.00 for a certified copy. Once you have your grant, photocopy it and send the duplicate to the Ontario Landowners association.

To aquire your patent you can call 705 755 2193.

72 Replies to “You HAVE land rights. You just didn’t know it.”

  1. I am a direct descendant of Lord William McGillivray who was given a 11,550 Acre Crown Patent from his Majesty in 1824 for his service of 1814 against the Americans. I have a copy of his will & his Crown Patent from the Ontario Crown Registry. It stated heirs were to have mineral rights below ground & all trees. I have contacted my local Federal MP with scanned copies directed to Mr. LeMeiux & his colleague Dr. Maurice Vellacott to check if a Federal Crown Patent could be extinguished but have not heard a response. I wonder if you can answer this for me. My phone number is in Plantagenet where I now presently reside 613-673-1195. I have proof on a lineage tree given to me from Peter Boyle at Fort William, Thunder Bay done by Marjorie W-Campbell that I am a direct descendant. By the way Quebec Archives also sent me a copy of John MacGillivary’s will who owned a farm on the English River on Raisin River who left no heirs but in his will he mentioned any McGillivray’s. William McGillivray my grandfather was his uncle does this mean I have entitlement to that property as well? I could scan the will which details the property dimensions to you. I have no clue how to go about this. Simon McGillivary, my G-uncle, also left a Township- west of London Ontario but I have not pursued that property. Wonder if you could give me some direction?

      • We go to court in the week of March the 9th to 13th for motions to be heard. My Lawyer Terry Green has requested 3/4 of a day for this to be presented. The down side is that the court only has to give 24 hours notice of what day this will be heard. Terry travels in from Ottawa.

        I would suggest that you also go to the land office and search the title from the Grant to present day to prove your Alodial Title, print out all deeds and read them. Alodial Title means that no one has dedicated any use of your land. That claim must be on your deed to be valid to others.

        TonyK.

        • Tony, I wish you success in your claim. Please let citizens know how you made out by way of a letter to the editor in the Ontario Farmer Newspaper. A lot of rural landowners would like to know if you were successful. Thank you for challenging the CA! I’m a Landowner who has researched all her titles and deeds back to the crown land patent. So many other articles say that CLP are not really worth much as government seems to have authority to legislate over private land. You are referencing the CA. What about MOE and MNR? Do they have authority?

          • What you need to remember is that there are 2 streams of Law. Legislative law and common law.

            In legislative law if the town or CA passes a by law not to cut down trees and you cut down a tree on your own land, basically you are guilty. Although your Crown Grant states ” together with all of the woods and waters on to the said Grantee heirs and assigns forever” the court is reading the legislated law and you have violated it. That being said if you state that your rights have been violated because your Crown Grant states that you have right to the Trees then you must make a constitutional challenge and put both the Attorney General of Canada and the Province on notice when your claim is filed. You are stating the the law is an Ultra vires. Not doing so will not result in ruling of any depth or in your favour.

            About 2 weeks ago we found the case of the Queen Vrs Robertson 1882, it is a supreme court ruling in favour of Roberston. The 9 justices explain in great detail how right is determined in the case. And that BNA was never given right over private property from the Imperial Act of Great Britain. It also states that for parliament to be able to make a law on private property, it must have been given that right. At the time Canada consisted of Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

            The issue was that the Ministry of Fisheries gave out commercial licence to fish in the Mirimachi River, Robertson had title over the river in his Crown Grant. The ruling makes it clear that only one entity can have right or title, either the Crown owns the water or the Patentee owns the water and land beneath the river.

            The case is 92 pages long and in reading you will see how it repeats it’s self as each justice comments on the Grants and determines his ruling. I would suggest going to the end of the document to read the rulings and then go back to the beginning to understand the weighing of information that brought them to the ruling.

            [Page 142]
            HENRY, J.:—
            After a full consideration of the issues before us I think the appeal in this case should be dismissed. The British North America Act of 1867 conveys to the Dominion no property in the sites of the sea coast or inland fisheries, as I construe it. In section 91, which defines the powers of the Dominion Parliament, we find included “Sea coast and inland fisheries.” That provision in the enumeration of the powers enables the Parliament of the Dominion to legislate on the subject, as it does in respect to matters such as “Shipping and navigation,” “Ferries,” “Bills of exchange and promissory notes” and many others, without passing any right of property in the several subject-matters. In fact, in my opinion the power under the Act is but to regulate the fisheries and to sustain and protect them by grants of money and otherwise as might be considered expedient.
            Independently of the Imperial statute the Dominion Parliament has no power to legislate in respect of property or civil rights in the Province, and could not otherwise by enactment affect the tenure of or title to real property. By the common law the owner of the soil has the right of fishery in unnavigable streams and water courses. That right, to be taken away, restrained, or transferred must be by a Parliament having jurisdiction over the subject-matter, and to possess and exercise the power to interfere with and control private property and interests there must have been an express grant of that power in the Imperial Act. I have searched in vain for such, or even anything that would suggest the conclusion that such was intended. I am therefore of the opinion that the leases granted by the several Ministers of Marine and Fisheries, so far as they cover private property or affect private rights, are wholly irregular and void.

            A long but educational read.

            TonyK.

  2. Hello
    We are having the same problems with claiming our land rights in Manitoba. We do have a lawyer and we’ve researched every possible Canada Law, Statute, Civil etc. till the cows come home. Everywhere we’ve been, everything we’ve read, constitutes the land belongs to our family. The District Registrars in Manitoba (6 DR.) all have denied the Laws and Statutes that protect our land rights. We have found cases dating back to the 1800’s who presented their cases in Manitoba and won because of the laws and legislation. We are pursuing this matter to the Supreme Court if necessary.
    We are searching for other people who are having the same issues to pursue them with their MP’s and on all levels of government.
    P.S. We were told that 95% of lawyers, government officials, and others don’t know the laws when it comes to Land Patent Rights.

    Also looking for another lawyer who is experienced in this field for consultation purposes. Please forward any information you have that would support our claim.
    Thank You, Eva

    • Hi Eva,

      How far have you gotten with your case?

      I am charged for being a camping griminal on my own land.

      Go to trial Jan 28th.

      Regards,

      Bob

      • Here is the response from the MNR that voids conditions on the Patents. I am not making this up this legislation passed many years ago.

        1. reservations of mineral rights in grants prior to May 6, 1913 are void (Section 61 of the Public Lands Act) – you would now own the complete mining rights
        2. reservations of trees granted under any Act prior to April 1, 1869 are void (Section 58 of the Public Lands Act) – you would now own all trees, regardless of species
        3. “Surveyor General of Woods” condition is void (Section 10 of the Public Lands Amendment Act, 1956)
        4. “Time Limit – Dwelling Construction and Residency” condition is void (Section 7 of the Public Lands Amendment Act, 1957)
        5. “Oaths Prescribed by Law” condition is void (Section 8 of the Public Lands Amendment Act, 1957)
        6. the proviso to not sell the land within three years is not void, but as you state below, provided Mr. Fitzgerald did not sell within three years, this proviso would have no effect today

        It is my understanding that the veteran’s entitlement was the grant of land, which Mr. Fitzgerald received by virtue of this patent.

        A soldier in the war of 1812 received 200 acres of land for his service, this was Granted by the Crown King George the Third.

        TonyK.

          • I should also add that the Grant from the Crown cannot be changed by any government as they are of a lower tier than the Crown. The province should it so choose may not enforce parts of the Grant, for instance the reservation of White Pine trees. That being said if the Crown for some reason now wanted the White Pine trees, no once could contest it because it has been written on the Crown Grant.

            TonyK.

      • Hi Bob, currently I will attending Divisional Court on Tuesday December the 9th for Motions. The Town has stated with the OMB that they feel my claim should go to a higher court and do not want to decide on my Claim of a Crown Land Patent.

        On Monday December the 1st I attended the Town’s inauguration where I witnessed the councilors of the Town Swear an oath of allegence to the Queen, Sovereign of the Crown.

        For them not to abide by the will of the Crown states a violation of their oath and they are holding the Crown in Contempt. The town therefore has risen above the Crown.

        As stated by Senator Len Harris a river can never rise above it’s source. No government can rise above the Crown.

        Please remember that the Prerogative of the Crown is to act without accountability to parliament, to act without restriction. I think it has been so long that no one understands who the Crown really is and what sworn oath really means.

        TonyK.

          • Hi Bob,

            Well kind of as expected. The regular Judge was not in that day a sub sat that day on the bench. Court Room 600 had 30 cases we were number 30. The judge came into the court room and sat down and stated the Following. Case number 30 in the matter of Anthony and Sarina Kaluzny vs. The town of Grimsby, I have before me motions that are piled 3 inches high. Normally I see 3 or 4 pages. If you can present motions in 1 hour that is 30 minutes for each side I will listen. I suggest that both Councillors go out into the hall and see if you can trim this down to 1 hour in total. Both Councillors left the court room and returned about 45 minutes latter declaring that they need 3/4 of a day. The judge replied that he had skimmed through the case and felt that it is an important case and justice would not be done in 1 hour. The court scheduler has us slotted for the week of March the 9th, the date to be confirmed in the new year. So I kinda got side stepped. The down side is that I am paying Terry Green and his Para Legal’s expenses to travel in from Ottawa, put them up in a hotel and feed them too. We are talking thousands of dollars here. So for now all I can do is wait. The judge felt that the case had merit and that it should be heard.

            TonyK.

            • TonyK – is your case now part of case law? I am wanting to include it in my motion to dismiss in my case which relies on Crown Patents and the rights they give the owner of the property they pertain to.

              • Hi Jenn, please read this.

                Kaluzny v. Town of Grimsby, June 19, 2015. Justice D. Parayeski in his Reasons for Judgement states “whether the Crown patent precludes a municipality from an acting bylaws that limit an owner’s right to use his or her land subject only to the common law. … The proper forum, in my view, is the Superior Court of Justice on notice to, at the very least, the province. I agree that what is really being raised by the Kaluznys’ is indeed a constitutional issue.”

                My Lawyer Terry Green had us do due process of law, meaning we appealed to the Town of Grimsby and then to the OMB. The reason for this was so that when we take the case to Superior Court they cannot tell me that I did not follow due process of law and refuse to hear the case. All said this exercise cost us $22K. So now for someone else using defence of Right and your Crown Grant, you can request that your case be heard in Superior court because the lower courts cannot rule on Right, but only on Law.’

                I could give you other case law to read and apply to your case if you would like my email is ( [email protected])

                Thanks.

                TonyK.

  3. The land grants have been to the supreme court many times and win. There is much case law on them and have been used many times here in Ontario to hold the long arm of the government at bay.

    The conservation authorities have no real authority to enter your property and tell you what to do on your land, and cannot impose regulations on you. You need to know your land grant rights, and you need to do a title search from your present deed to the grant itself. This applies not only in all of Canada, but in the entire British commonwealth. For more information on the topic you can go to the Ontario Landowners website and look for a link about land grants. There is a downloadable pdf with all the information you need.

  4. Hello Nick.
    I listen to both your pod-casts with Liz Marshall, an amazing women. Liz and I and the OLA as you know have been working together to bring the authority of the Letters Patent forward and return property rights to people of Ontario.
    The case of the Peat Moss Farmers will be tested in court Nov. 14, 2011.

    Bob Mackie of “Mackie Mountain Archery”
    Nov. 14, 2011
    2:00p.m.
    Ontario Court Of Justice
    2nd Floor Courtroom #5
    59 Church Street,
    St. Catharines, ON

    Peat Farmers (George Eng)
    Nov. 14, 2011,
    9: a.m.
    Rm 103,
    605 Rossland Rd.,
    Whitby, ON.

  5. As an update, he will be going back to court in March 2012 and will be appearing on the Lowell Green show as a guest before that, likely in the last week of February. That of course is entirely dependant on the schedule for Mr Green remaining the same.

  6. Hi Nick,

    I am currently being charged with “failing to comply with the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-133” for operating a motorized recreational vechile (dirtbike) on my own 38 acres! In section 37 of the ORM plan in states “non motorized trails” as one of the permitted uses in the natural core area….. I have purchased and received my certified crown land patent grant and was hoping it might help my case.
    What do you think?

    Thanks,

    Adam

  7. I presently have a commercial property de zoned by the city of Kawartha Lakes in their OP because it is in the Oak Ridges Moraine.I have an OMB hearing Nov 13 2013 in Lindsay Ont.

  8. I apologize for the long delay in responding. I am guessing that by now Adam has already been pulled through the ringer, so let me deal with Bill.

    To begin with, No one has the right to tell you what to do on your land. IF they don’t own it, they can’t plan for it, and that goes for Conservation authorities, municipalities, provincial and federal governments. With that said, here is what you need to do in my opinion. First, put up the landowner “back off government” signs at all access points to your property. Then post what is kn own as an entry contract. This lays out the terms and conditions under which people who want to come onto your property must abide by. You should be able to get them from your local landowners association. I also highly recommend you join that group so you are not alone. Thirdly, I would seek legal counsel. I am not a lawyer and do not give legal advice.

    When that is done, Inform your municipality that Your property is now posted and that any further contact with you is subject to the entry contract as posted and that if anyone proceeds with the prosecution of this by law infraction, you will sue everyone involved at the municipality under sec. 448.2 of the Ontario municipal act. I include it here for your information.:

    Liability for torts
    (2) Subsection (1) does not relieve a municipality of liability to which it would otherwise be subject in respect of a tort committed by a member of council or an officer, employee or agent of the municipality or a person acting under the instructions of the officer, employee or agent. 2001, c. 25, s. 448 (2).

    Keep in mind that you need to get your land grant patent and do a title search right back to the grant itself so you know what your rights are. Once you have that done, and belong to a landowner group, you will be a far more intimidating target.

    Let me know how it goes.

  9. Teresa.

    I take it that by the word “registering” you land patent, you mean apply for it or acquire it. All you need is your lot and concession number, and the original name of the township it was granted in. You need a certified copy and a lot of patience. It will take about 2 years to get, and will cost you $50.00 for the first three pages and three dollars for each page thereafter. Most grants run around 50 to 100 bucks, depending on how many pages there are.

    The name on the patent does not change, regardless of who owns the land at any given time.

    I hope this helps!

    • Go to your local Algonquin College they have all the information. free of charge on the title search rite back to the original person it was granted to. Hope it helps you

      • Thank you so much I have my crown land patent I just have to learn how to search it as I went to the court house a while back and I didn’t really know what I needed to look for or what I was looking at once I got the micro Fische rolls . I have the owners name who the king granted it to now I just need to reasearch it

  10. Thank you I already have my certified copy of my Crown Land Patent do I just go to St. Catharines City Hall and file this with my deed what and how do I ,,, or what is the next steps i take to do anything with the Crown Land Patent I have it where and what do i do now ? Plus what is the cost to file this if there is any. My land was only used for Minerals and Metals as well as White pine trees of course there is none now. Please Help 🙂

  11. Also please note that the new Bylaw is coming out in DEC 16Th 2013 for St.Catharines But they are trying to push it through so for November 16th so People have no Rights if you read the bylaw as well as you wont even be able to use the driveway attached to your own property as they want it where your car does not stick out past the house Read the new proposed St. Catharines Bylaw what joke

  12. Teresa.
    You need to do a title search from now, right back to the grant itself. This is the only way you will know exactly what your rights are. There is no need to “register” your grant, all you should do after that is to post your property with back off government signs and make sure that your township knows that any trespass by bylaw or municipal officials will be treated as criminal trespass and charges will be laid.

    You should also join your local landowners groups and make sure they are aware of this new bylaw.

    Keep me posted on events as they unfold. 🙂

    • Nick Thank you the only things on the Crown Land Patent were there were minerals and white pine trees there is nothing else retraining the property use its one page and the guy John Price had it in May 6 1796 township of Grantham . It says that any incumberances are released when John Price got ownership and he was allowed to build on the property and use the property as he wishes and even the Lawyer said no restrictions are what he could find either . I live in St.Catharines so I guess i will look up Landowners here I think they are the same ones Bob Mackie has. Wouldnt you want to register the Crown Land Patent to be your own with your Land ?

      • Ok How do i do a Title search do i need a lawyer ? How much will this cost . Hey look on the back of the card board yellow sheet see what your Liber is and Folio as it pulls up like ancestors

  13. You can do a title search by yourself. Just go to your local registry office and yo should be fine. I would think that Bob Mackie’s group is the right one for your area.

  14. WOW it’s good to know there are others out there like me. I own 30 acres of PSW. Recenlty had 3 neighbors affecting the functions of it. The Township with the farmer across the street opened up my properpty at the roadside ditch and let the farmer field and roadside ditch flood into my property. When I plugged it. The farmer called the NPCA and I was charge with 3 different charges. I have contacted everyone you can think of even the board for a meeting. NO ! WAY! I am going into year 2 and on my 3 rd lawyer. The farmer at the south tresspassed and tug trenches 50-100ft into my property and drained my big ponds. We I showed this to the NPCA they told me it was a civil matter because they could not prove who or when it was done.All these neighbors are related with family working at the Township and NPCA. I have every law you can think of but I am still fighting. Any HELP!!!!!!!!! Niagara area

    • If you had a land survey done there is proof they trespassed as the city gets a copy as well as yourself join The OLA as they will help you fight contacted Bob Mackie in Beamsville On 905-563-5852 . The Land Surveyors are Mascoe in St.Catharines. .If you have any pictures for proof of what your land looks like before they did the damage would be great for your case too
      Also U may want to try some video cams if they are all in it together

  15. hello,
    I have the original land grant document from 1835 granting ownership forevermore to my great great grandfather and his heirs 100 acre lot in Lambton County , with his last entry mentioning 21 years of land leasing for oil drill purposes..
    I also know about 130 acres that my Great Great Great grandfather [ dad of the above] bought from the Canada Company that is now lying vacant…
    Could you please tell me what I should do re this? Is it worthwhile to search above trail of ownership of both above properties?

    • The patent is the foundation of alienation of land from the Crown into private ownership.

      On it, it states the reservations, conditions and proviso’s of the release of the land from the crown to the original settler or patentee. By searching the title you will be able to prove that the land has passed from owner to owner without encumberance, easement or dedication back to the government or agencies. If you have your patent, line scan it and go to the Ministry of Natural Resources website. (Sent a line scanned copy to them.) It will tell you about land patents ( grants) and if you email to their provided address they can tell you the status of your land with regard to the patent.

      I did just this very enquiry in May of this year. The MNR replied that I have title over all waters, all mining rights and all trees on my land. My deed shows I have title to the land. It is a powerful argument to put down in front of any local government.

      Do a title search and obtain a copy of all deeds, quit claims and wills pertaining to your lot.

      TonyK.

      • Thanks, Tony, for your help.
        I believe my confusion with all the above posts is what happens to the original family’s rights when that person’s ancestor that originally was granted that patent right, sells that property to another family since the awarding of the first grant from the Crown? I believe all the above posters are secondary or later owners of the property, yet the original document I have states that this parcel of land and its corresponding rights to minerals, white pines, and water will remain with this family forevermore…. Which family’s rights trump the other – the present landowner’s or the original landowner’s? Thank you for your help.

        • Okay, I want you to go to your deed and look at page three.

          On it will state to the said grantee ( buyer) to have and to hold for their sole an only use forever. Subject nevertheless to the reservation, conditions and provisoes of the original grant from the crown. If you do a title search and obtain all deeds from the grant to your name on it this language will be on ever title which forwards your entitlement to you from the Crown. Even if you do not have a deed look at the upper right hand corner of you land transfer and it will state ” Subject to the reservations of the Crown Grant”

          Every land document in this province make reverence back to the Crown Grant, the problem is that no one reads their deed. Your Lawyer doesn’t read the deed or Crown Grant. They are all to busy making sure there was a survey, encroachments and that the Hydro meter has been read. They want their money and to hell with your rights to your property.

          TonyK.

        • Line scan is a term for making digital copy of any document. Staples can do it for you and burn the information to a disk or a USB stick. ( Cost is pennies) Just a note here recently the MNR ( July 30 2014) has changed their web site and have made it more difficult for you to find information on Land Patents of the past. ( you have to do some digging in their website.) Also I have been talking to people that have requested the current status of their grant ( patent) and the MNR has replied that if they want more information they need to contact a Lawyer. I will guess that the MNR has been flooded with requests and is trying to make people go away from legal knowledge about their lands. As of May of 2014 the MNR replied to me that I own all of the trees regardless of species, all of the water laying and being and all mineral and mining rights. So then, how does the conservation authority have any say on what I own if the MNR who they work for disagrees. As you can see either no one talks to each other, or the whole process is to hood wink you into believing something that is without foundation.

          TonyK.

          • Thanks Tony I will get to mine I did send you a copy of my crown patent at one time Bob Mackie seen mine when I went to him before his passing . He liked it said was older than his . I haven’t had time to get up there and research mine yet

  16. The rights to any property stay until the owner of the property enters into an agreement. The crown has stated it reservations in the Crown Grant.
    Let’s say in 1910 Ontario Hydro wanted a power corridor easement and an agreement was made with the owner of the land at that time. That easement now carries forward until the holder of the easement forfeits their right to it and it now goes back to the property owner. An easement is a contract with or without a time limit and it will be stated on the deed when the person sold the property and noted as an encumbrance to that land.
    That being said a lawyer only does a title search back 40 years and people have been known to encroach onto the easement which is a violation of a prior agreement. That is why it is important to do a complete title search so that you can follow the transfer of entitlements of the property to your name comes up on the deed in your hand.

    TonyK.

      • The MNR , Ministry of Natural Resources location of patent documents Peterbrough Ontario. Their main offices could be in Toronto and I know there is one I think in North Bay.

        The land registry office is located for all townships in Niagara on the first floor of the Court House in St. Catharines 59 Church street. There you will find copies of all land documents ( Deeds) for your property.

        TonyK.

          • Teresa, life is funny at times. As I read through the MNR’s website in May of t 2014 it had a contact us section with links to the Minster of Natural Resources and the MNR office. This was in May of 2014. I asked for the definition of the phrase on my patent” Together with all of the woods and waters laying and being” and wanted to know if this statement still holds true. A response came the next day from a person in the MNR that was a land specialist who stated “The Courts have held that the “together with the woods and waters thereon lying” clause simply gave the patentee the right to use any water and trees existing on the land, subject to any reservation of specific tree species (i.e. White Pine) to the Crown.” The patentee is the owner of the land.

            The closing statement on the email was, “If you have any questions, feel free to email or call me, and I would be happy to assist you in determining which reservations and conditions are void, and which are still in effect.” Which I did respond to.

            Please understand that the patent is an imperial document of the Crown, heirs and successors. It directs the Federal and Provincial Governments of what the land owner and the crown retains going forward. In response, a nut shell response the province ( not the federal government ) through legislation has voided all interests to all trees, all minerals with mining rights and all waters of the lands. I have this email with a detailed response.

            A week ago a person that I had reviewed his patent sent an email to the MNR asking the very same question about his patent. The response from the MNR now was to obtain the services of a lawyer to find out the current status of his land and patent. I find this response troubling, as this information is a matter of public record and should not be hidden or concealed.

            I was fortunate that the person responding from the MNR quoted the legislation that voided the provinces interests in private lands, the act and the year that this legislation had been passed.

            In my patent a reservation was stated that the patentee was required to build a dwelling within 1 year and could not sell the land for 3 years. This is where you must do a title search. The land was sold 8 years latter and stated on the deed of sale that it included all structures, houses and out houses. This proved that the first owner of the land had met his obligation with the Crown and that the patent was valid.

            Sorry for the long response, but this is a complicated topic. If you have any more questions, please post them.

            TonyK.

        • Tony can you share this information?
          “I was fortunate that the person responding from the MNR quoted the legislation that voided the provinces interests in private lands, the act and the year that this legislation had been passed.”

          It would be much appreciated.

          Bob

  17. Hi,

    I understand that sometime during the previous centuries, the Queen of England gave some laws with regard at the ownership, use and administration to the land in Canada.
    At the same time, the Queen of England gave some laws with regard at death penalty by hanging. Later, the Queen of England- WHICH IS REPRESENTED IN CANADA BY THE GOVERNMENT (you know, these people who want to come to your door to enforce the NEW by-laws and laws, and who you are trying to charge them criminally)-modified the hanging law and modified the laws regarding the land ownership, in the later coming up with a NUMBER OF NEW LAWS REGARDING THE CONSERVATION OF THE LAND, as opposed with barbaric exploitation.
    MAY BE IS TIME TO TRY TO READ SOMETHING AND TO TRY TO LIVE AND EVOLVE AT THE NEW MILLENIUM DEMANDS.
    My advice to you is to get-out from middle-age and to understand that the realities then were different from these from today, the knowledge was different and the society was different.
    THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND IS LIVING IN TODAY’S REALITIES and Her laws and by-laws-given by Her representatives in Canada, the Government of Canada at all levels, are modern, advanced and her representatives are trying to enforce them-too soft maybe.
    Carmen J.

    • You obviously don’t own any property to know what bylaws are . King George gave the Crown Land patents to War veterans who made it home for their families and themselves to cultivate and work as their own . The early settlers time era . It is a part of history and when you look it up under King George and his men you may see what it means . It wouldn’t have come under this Queens rules it dates back to uncultivated underpopulated areas in Canada look it up .

  18. The Queen her heir and successors in the line of the Monarchy owned the 15 colonies. We the people still to this day to my understanding pay the successor of King George 50% of the royalties and 5% of the profits to the Monarchy. The royal family is real and they owned all of the lands that you and I currently own, they have entitlement as they once owned it. So for those that state we must be of this time and not of the past, then tell that to the Queen who still reaps the profits of this day, based on the past agreements.

    As or ownership of property it is a contract between the monarchy and the land owner, heirs and assigns forever. Call it the past call it out dated and I will agree with you, but the Queen still has entitlement to royalties and profits of 15 colonies. When the Queen gives up her right then possibly so shall the land owners. Until that time, then the Queen and the landowners are bound by law decided and prescribed hundreds of years ago. Whether you like it, agree with it or accept it, that is the law, that is how it is.

    TonyK.

  19. We must fight for our rights. I got a visit from my By law officer for a complaint from my neighbor over my chickens. It turns out that Minden does not allow any form of Agriculture when you own lake front properties. Yep, we can not grow a tomato or have an apple tree , Seems we are not entitled to Life and Liberty as per our constitution. I informed her my rights were God given not Municipal Government given. Food is required for life but we are not allowed to cultivate it. The Queen swears to uphold all laws as per the KJV Bible, Genesis1. 28 states we are to hold dominion over the land and animals. The Second treatise of Civil Government by John Locke 1690 expresses mans right to till and graze as an order from God and to draw subsistence from it.
    The worse part of it is in my patent which comes with two easements , the Queen gives Ont Hydro and Bell the explicit right to grow crops and /or graze animals on such easement.
    Has anyone had or heard of similar problems and how to beat city hall and their self pompous authority over my land.
    Give me a call at 705 854 1493 , or email at [email protected]

  20. OK I finished reading the Ontario Public Lands Act and I found the following references that I found informative:

    Entry upon private land
    (2) Subject to subsection (4), an officer appointed under subsection (1) and any person accompanying that officer and acting under the officer’s instructions may, at all reasonable times and upon producing proper identification, enter and inspect any private land for the purposes of this Act. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 5 (2)

    “PART II
    ROADS ON PUBLIC LANDS
    No liability for damages
    50. (1) No civil action shall be brought against the Crown or any person in respect of misfeasance, non-feasance or negligence in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair or closing of a road. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 50 (1).”

    OK here I had to look up what “misfeasance” means and I found this on Wikipedia

    ” When a contract creates a duty that does not exist at common law, there are three things the parties can do wrong:
    • Nonfeasance is the failure to act where action is required – willfully or in neglect.
    • Misfeasance is the willful inappropriate action or intentional incorrect action or advice.
    • Malfeasance is the willful and intentional action that injures a party.”

    Seems to me that subsection 50 is not lawful.

    One further subsection refers to privete property.

    “Power to enter and use
    75. (1) In the event of emergency, as declared by the Lieutenant Governor in Council, respecting the safety of persons or the protection or preservation of public or private property, the Minister or any person authorized by the Minister, may, without the consent of the owner,
    (a) enter upon and use any land;
    (b) alter in any manner any natural or artificial feature of any land;
    (c) construct and use roads on, to and from any land;
    (d) construct and use all necessary sidings, water pipes, conduits or tracks in, over or upon any land; or
    (e) place upon or remove from any land any substance or structure. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 75 (1).
    Compensation
    (2) Any powers referred to in subsection (1) may be exercised immediately despite any provision of the Expropriations Act and without the filing of a plan and the owner of the land is entitled to compensation in the manner provided in that Act. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 75 (2).”

    Bob

    • Bob you have been busy reading, impressive.

      Now you are getting somewhere. Most acts are written in Statue Law ( Civil Law) not common law.

      The patents/Grants are Common Law as they are from the Crown and this is where authorities get mixed up with their authority and breach of rights to Private property owners.

      75. (1) In the event of emergency, as declared by the Lieutenant Governor in Council, respecting the safety of persons or the protection or preservation of public or private property, the Minister or any person authorized by the Minister, may, without the consent of the owner,

      We are talking harm here, an emergency. Cutting down a tree is not an emergency. Moving some dirt on your land is not an emergency. This is where things go hay wire.
      To enter the land requires obtaining a warrant and if you remember the MNR holds all of the Patent/Grant records and as stated earlier in this thread, Land Ownership as referred to my contract with the Crown and the excluded interests of the Province, stating, I own all of the trees on my land. Please remember that the Lieutenant Governor is below the Governor General who is below the Crown. The issuance of the Grants/Patents are from the Sovereign the CEO of the Crown so to speak. They are the prerogative of the Crown, which is to state, to Act without accountability to Parliament, to act without restriction. The Crown Grants/Letters Patent have not and cannot be repealed unless the constitution is reopened or we separate from the Common Wealth. All law or Proclamations after 60 years cannot be altered, enhanced or repealed, we must live with it.

      Now to this part.

      ” When a contract creates a duty that does not exist at common law, there are three things the parties can do wrong:

      A deed or a title is in FEE SIMPLE the highest form of entitlement to land that there is. That deed or title is a contract with THE CROWN and the terms on the Grant/Patent have been established by the Crown, heirs and assigns forever. If you understand these facts and now read all Civil Law you will see that the boundaries are apparent of what statue law can do on private land.

      The term a man’s home is his castle came from the fact that the King or Queen has given up their Right to the land through the Grant and if the King/Queen has no right then how could any government have right above the Crown.

      In the words of Senator Len Harris, simply put. ” A river can never rise above it’s source.” No government can rise above the Crown.

      TonyK.

  21. I bought 100 acres on the Ottawa river in Grand Calumet Quebec and I’m told that I cannot build and cannot disturbed any land, I can’t even put a trailer on my land. Does anyone else have this problem or can guide me in the proper direction. I will apply for a pattent grant and would like to join some type of organization. Any advise would be greatly appreciated.

    • Mark currently I am not sure, but I will ask and get back to you. I want you to remember that there are 2 streams of law. Legislative law the deals with the public good, but at times oversteps it’s authority and common law that deals with the rights of people. In this case common law is the prerogative of the Crown and the Crown is above all legislative law. Land was granted to settlers by the crown or king and it is a direct agreement between the King and the person who has title to the land. The term in most cases is Heirs and Assigns forever. For some this is difficult to grasp as they have been surrounded by Legislative law for so long that they don’t know that common law, law of the people exists. Look at your deed or land document, it should make reference to the Grant from the Crown. Sadly most do not obtain it to see what their right and entitlement is to the very land that they own.

      I will ask some questions out here and post back to you.

      Thank you for your interest.

      TonyK.

    • Mark to my understanding there are no groups out west. There is a very knowledgeable fellow in Alberta that tried to get a group together but interest was not there. If you are interested I could have you put on the email list here and that would give you a start to understand what this is about.

      Since this form does not allow blind emailing,

      I would suggest that you go to the link

      http://www.ontariolandowners.ca/?news&nid=64

      Contact Tom or Marlene Black and ask to get on to the mailing list and also ask for my email address so that be added to the email list of the chapter I belong to.

      TonyK.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.