In 1878, a township was surveyed in Muskoka. The returns of survey included the surveyor’s
drawing of the Township Plan, a small portion of which appears at Figure 1. Separate patents
were given for Lots 12 and 13, Concession III, and Lot 12, Concession IV, in 1880, 1881 and 1882
respectively, and all subsequent dealings with title were under the Land Titles Act.
In 1968, a surveyor was asked to prepare a survey for the owner at that time of Lot 13,
Concession III. Part of that survey appears at Figure 2.
Today, you are the surveyor who is asked to survey the West Half of Lot 13, Concession III. In
doing so, you are told that the owner of Lot 13, Concession III, was able to get a severance
approved, but that application for severance was not based on any survey work. When your
field crew returns from the initial survey of the site and the data is downloaded, it plots out as
shown in Figure 3. None of the figures are to scale.
3
Figure 1 — Rudimentary sketch of Part of 1878 of the Township Survey Plan1
1 Dimensions and numbering of lots and concessions are not indicated in Figure 1. However, since the general
geographic location and year of survey are known, it is possible to determine the system of survey reflected in the
sketch. If unable to achieve a determination, refer to the regulation R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 1029: SURVEY METHODS
under Ontario’s Surveys Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.30.
4
Figure 2 — Part of 1968 Survey
5
Figure 3 — Survey from Field Crew
6
QUESTIONS
1. When did the boundary between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III, and Lot 12, Concession IV,
come into legal existence? When did it come into physical existence?
2. What is your opinion of the boundary location between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III? Why?
3. Is the part shown on Figure 3 part of your client’s property? Why? Or why not?
4. Based on your answer in 2 above, what does this do to the ownership of cottage B? What
more information do you need to answer this question?
1. The legal existence of the boundary between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III, and Lot 12, Concession IV came into existence when separate patents were issued for these lots in 1880, 1881, and 1882. The physical existence of the boundary would have been established during the original survey of the township in 1878.
2. Based on the information provided, it is difficult to form a concrete opinion on the boundary location between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III. The figures provided do not include accurate scale or measurements, making it challenging to assess the boundary location with precision. An on-site survey using accurate surveying techniques and measurements would be required to determine the exact boundary between the two lots.
3. The part shown in Figure 3 is not necessarily part of the client's property. The figure does not provide enough information to determine the boundaries of the client's property accurately. A more thorough survey, including accurate measurements and boundary markers, would be required to confirm the boundaries of the client's property.
4. Without a specific determination of the boundary location between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III, it is not possible to determine the impact on the ownership of cottage B. More information, such as an accurate survey and legal documents regarding boundaries and ownership, would be needed to assess the ownership of cottage B accurately.
1. The boundary between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III, and Lot 12, Concession IV, came into legal existence when separate patents were given for these lots. Lot 12 and Lot 13, Concession III, received patents in 1880 and 1881 respectively, while Lot 12, Concession IV, received a patent in 1882. Therefore, the legal boundary between these lots came into existence in those respective years.
The physical existence of the boundary would depend on when it was actually surveyed and marked on the ground. However, based on the information provided, the exact date of the physical survey and marking is not given.
2. Without the exact dimensions and measurements, it is difficult to determine the exact location of the boundary between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III. However, based on the provided sketch (Figure 1) which shows a rudimentary outline of the township survey plan, and assuming it reflects the system of survey conducted in 1878, it can be inferred that the boundary location shown in the sketch was determined during the original survey and has been legally recognized since then.
3. Based on the information provided, it is not possible to determine if the part shown on Figure 3 is part of the client's property. The exact location and boundaries of the West Half of Lot 13, Concession III, would need to be determined through a proper survey. Additionally, the discrepancy in the plot from the field crew suggests that further investigation and verification are required.
4. Without knowing the exact location and boundaries of the West Half of Lot 13, Concession III, it is not possible to determine the impact on the ownership of cottage B. Further information, such as a proper survey of the lot, would be needed to accurately determine the impact on ownership.
1. To determine when the boundary between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III, and Lot 12, Concession IV, came into legal existence, you would need to access the patents given for these lots in 1880, 1881, and 1882 respectively. These patents would contain information about the legal establishment of the boundaries between these lots. Additionally, you may need to refer to the Land Titles Act to understand how subsequent dealings with the title were handled.
To determine when the boundary came into physical existence, you would need to refer to the original 1878 township survey plan (Figure 1) and analyze the surveyor's drawing. The plan should indicate the actual physical locations of these lots within the township. By comparing this plan to the subsequent surveys, such as the 1968 survey (Figure 2) and the field crew survey (Figure 3), you can determine when the boundaries were physically established.
2. To form an opinion about the location of the boundary between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III, you would need to compare the information available from the different surveys (e.g., the 1878 township survey plan, the 1968 survey, and the field crew survey).
Carefully analyzing the data, including the location and dimensions of the lots, any markers or monuments indicated in the surveys, and any additional information about the surveying methods used, can help you form an opinion about whether the boundary appears to be properly located. You may also need to consider any relevant regulations or guidelines related to survey methods in Ontario.
3. To determine if the part shown on Figure 3 is part of your client's property, you need to compare the field crew survey data with the legal description of Lot 13, Concession III. The legal description should provide specific information about the boundaries and dimensions of the lot. By overlaying the field crew survey data onto the legal description, you can verify if the surveyed area aligns with your client's property.
If the surveyed area in Figure 3 falls within the boundaries of Lot 13, Concession III, then it would be part of your client's property. However, if it falls outside the boundaries, then it would not be part of your client's property.
4. Based on the answer provided in question 2 above, if the ownership of cottage B is affected by the boundary location between Lots 12 and 13, Concession III, you would need more information to fully assess the situation. Specifically, you would need details about the legal descriptions and boundaries of cottage B in relation to the boundaries of Lot 13, Concession III.
By comparing the legal description and boundaries of cottage B with the surveyed area in Figure 3, you can determine if any encroachments or overlaps exist. Additionally, understanding the legal status and any relevant property rights associated with cottage B, such as easements or agreements, would be helpful in making a conclusive assessment of the ownership situation.