Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The court cancelled a building-scheme restriction limiting use to “not more than one family,” finding the language ambiguous and unenforceable.
The court found the defendant’s property use breached zoning and unsightly-premises bylaws and granted declarations, injunctions, removal powers, and costs.
The Court held the Board did not err in law: in context the undefined term "intensive" in Policy 4.5.24(c) reasonably refers to focused, facility-based livestock activity (barns/feedlots/manure facilities) rather than intermittent outdoor pasturing; evidence showed the Pasture's use was seasonal and not intensive, the LUB's definitions and separation rules support that interpretation, and the Board properly accepted the Traffic Impact Study approved by the Department of Public Works; accordingly the Council's approval reasonably carried out the intent of the MPS and the appeal was dismissed.
Source excerpt
Appeal dismissed. The Court held the adjudicator erred in cancelling a zoning bylaw notice based on remedial efforts and an incorrect view of the zoning status.
The court set aside a bylaw adjudicator’s cancellation of a zoning bylaw ticket, holding the adjudicator exceeded her jurisdiction under the enforcement statute.
The court found a building scheme was not obsolete, but it amended an unclear tree restriction and granted a limited mandatory injunction for trees in the restricted zone.
The Court of Appeal held Richmond reasonably treated soil preloading as non-construction for permit-expiry purposes, restored the City’s decisions, and allowed both appeals.
The court held that excavation, structural fill, and preloading on the building footprint were “construction” under Richmond’s bylaw, so the permits did not expire.
The Court quashed Richmond’s decision that the petitioners’ permits had expired, holding that soil densification and preloading counted as construction under the bylaw.
The court held that short-term rentals on the two properties were not a lawful non-conforming use and granted declarations and a permanent injunction.
Explore more
