Oriole Lumber Ltd. v. Township of Markham et al.

Oriole Lumber Ltd. v. Township of Markham et al.

Wholesale and retail sales of lumber are not an accessory to 'warehousing and storage within enclosed buildings' as defined in By‑law 1957; the storage on the proposed premises was incidental to the primary commercial purpose of selling, therefore the use did not fall within the permitted 'industrial uses' and the mandamus ordering issuance of a building permit was not warranted.

Citation
[1968] SCR 549
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Oriole Lumber Limited; Respondent (defendant): The Corporation of the Township of Markham; Respondent (defendant): F.J. Fudge
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 April 1968
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of Appeal for Ontario)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (order of Court of Appeal allowing respondents restored)
Legal Topics
Zoning, Building Permit, Accessory Use, Interpretation of By‑laws, Mandamus
Source Language
English
Municipal Law Planning Law Administrative Law Land Use Regulation Zoning Building Permit Accessory Use Interpretation of By‑laws +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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oriole Lumber Limited

Appellant (plaintiff)

The Corporation of the Township of Markham

Respondent (defendant)

F.J. Fudge

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of Appeal for Ontario)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed lumber warehouse with wholesale and retail showroom is a permitted 'industrial use' under By‑law 1957
  2. 2 Whether wholesale or retail sales can be characterized as an 'accessory' use to warehousing and storage
  3. 3 Whether the mandamus compelling issuance of a building permit was properly granted

Ratio Decidendi

Wholesale and retail sales of lumber are not an accessory to 'warehousing and storage within enclosed buildings' as defined in By‑law 1957; the storage on the proposed premises was incidental to the primary commercial purpose of selling, therefore the use did not fall within the permitted 'industrial uses' and the mandamus ordering issuance of a building permit was not warranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (order of Court of Appeal allowing respondents restored)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Order of Moorhouse J. granting mandamus set aside; respondents not required to issue the building permit