City of Verdun v. Sun Oil Co.

City of Verdun v. Sun Oil Co.

The provision of s.76 purporting to vest in the municipal Council an unfettered discretion to grant or refuse permits was ultra vires because section 426 of the Cities and Towns Act delegates to municipalities a legislative power to regulate location and use by by-law, not to convert that regulatory scheme into ad hoc administrative discretion; accordingly the Court of Appeal's declaration that that portion of s.76 was void and its order for mandamus were correct; the applicant had sufficient legal interest and the City is bound by its litigation stance and cannot raise a new factual ground.

Citation
[1952] 1 SCR 222
Parties
Appellant (defendant): City of Verdun; Respondent (petitioner / Applicant): Sun Oil Company Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 December 1951
Procedural Posture
Mandamus Proceeding on Appeal; Validity of Municipal by Law Provision / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada — Final Judgment on Appeal (dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Mandamus, Ultra Vires, By Law Validity, Discretion of Municipal Council, Locus Standi / Legal Interest
Source Language
English
Municipal Law Administrative Law Prerogative Writs Public Law Mandamus Ultra Vires By Law Validity Discretion of Municipal Council +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

City of Verdun

Appellant (defendant)

Sun Oil Company Ltd.

Respondent (petitioner / Applicant)

Procedural Posture

Mandamus Proceeding on Appeal; Validity of Municipal by Law Provision / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada — Final Judgment on Appeal (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.76 of Verdun by-law which vests a discretionary power in Council to grant or refuse permits is ultra vires the municipality
  2. 2 Whether mandamus was the proper remedy to compel grant of permit or to obtain declaration of ultra vires
  3. 3 Whether the applicant had legal interest (locus standi) to institute the proceeding

Ratio Decidendi

The provision of s.76 purporting to vest in the municipal Council an unfettered discretion to grant or refuse permits was ultra vires because section 426 of the Cities and Towns Act delegates to municipalities a legislative power to regulate location and use by by-law, not to convert that regulatory scheme into ad hoc administrative discretion; accordingly the Court of Appeal's declaration that that portion of s.76 was void and its order for mandamus were correct; the applicant had sufficient legal interest and the City is bound by its litigation stance and cannot raise a new factual ground.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Portion of s.76 of By-law 128 purporting to vest discretion in Council to grant or deny permits declared ultra vires
  • Two Council resolutions refusing the permit annulled