Freitag v. Penetanguishene (Town)
The Court dismissed the appeal, endorsing the trial judge's reasoning that the appellant's interpretation of s.9(1) ¶ 8 is incorrect because it would render other provisions redundant, contradict enforcement practice and precedent, and thus municipalities may validly enact smoking bylaws consistent with the Act.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C42397
- Parties
- Appellant: Henry W. Freitag; Respondent: The Corporation of the Town of Penetanguishene
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 19 May 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Superior Court of Justice
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Interpretation of Statute, Municipal Bylaw Authority, Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Henry W. Freitag
Appellant
The Corporation of the Town of Penetanguishene
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Superior Court of Justice
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether s.9(1) ¶ 8 of the Tobacco Control Act precludes municipalities from enacting smoking bylaws
- 2 Whether the appellant's interpretation would render other provisions of the Act redundant or conflict with past enforcement
- 3 Whether municipal smoking bylaws are valid under Ontario law
Ratio Decidendi
The Court dismissed the appeal, endorsing the trial judge's reasoning that the appellant's interpretation of s.9(1) ¶ 8 is incorrect because it would render other provisions redundant, contradict enforcement practice and precedent, and thus municipalities may validly enact smoking bylaws consistent with the Act.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs fixed at $3,500.00 inclusive of disbursements and G.S.T.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Freitag v. Penetanguishene (Town) Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2005-05-19 Docket numbers C42397 Judges Catzman, Marvin Adrian; Labrosse, Jean-Marc; Moldaver, Michael James Subject Civil Decision Content DATE: 20050519 DOCKET: C42397 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HENRY W. FREITAG (Applicant/Appellant) -and- THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF PENETANGUISHENE (Respondent/Respondent in Appeal) BEFORE: CATZMAN, LABROSSE and MOLDAVER JJ.A. COUNSEL: John J. Winter for the appellant Frank N. Grisé for the respondent HEARD AND ENDORSED: May 18, 2005 On appeal from the judgment of Justice Mary J. Hatton of the Superior Court of Justice dated August 20, 2004. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] We would dismiss this appeal for the reasons of Hatton J., with which we are in substantial agreement. We would add only that, if the appellant’s interpretation of s. 9(1) ¶ 8 of the Tobacco Control Act is correct, other provisions of that section and of the Act would be redundant, the Province would have failed for the last eleven years to enforce its own legislation, municipalities across the province would have enacted smoking bylaws unnecessarily and/or in contravention of the Act, and it would fly in the face of decisions of this court and of other courts in Ontario that have considered the authority of municipalities to enact such bylaws. [2] The appeal is dismissed with costs, which we fix in the amount of $3,500.00, inclusive of disbursements and G.S.T.