Canada Case Law

Langford (City) v. Leppan

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found on the totality of the evidence that occupier Darcy Jovic knew of and permitted the ongoing storage, repair and sale of third‑party and unlicensed vehicles at 2616 Viola Place in breach of the Zoning Bylaw; because a bylaw breach was established the court granted declaratory relief and a statutory injunction to prevent future contraventions, but declined to order Jovic to obtain a business licence due to insufficient evidence of his direct commercial operation.

Source excerpt

• Statutory injunction
• Zoning bylaw contravention
• Vehicle storage
• Home occupation restrictions
• Business licensing
• Declaratory relief

Read case analysis

Temagami (Municipality) v. Temagami Barge Limited

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The application judge correctly applied the Saint Romuald test and, on the record, concluded none of the 13 uses qualified as legal non‑conforming; the permanent injunction and the costs order from the Superior Court were upheld, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellants failed to seek leave to appeal costs such that the costs award stood and the municipality was awarded appeal costs fixed at $25,000 inclusive.

Source excerpt

• Legal non‑conforming use (acquired rights)
• Injunction
• Expert evidence admissibility and weight
• Conversion of application to action (r.38.10)
• Costs and leave to appeal costs

Read case analysis

City of Surrey v. Johal

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed Surrey’s summary trial application seeking a zoning declaration and injunction over alleged clubhouse use at a residential property.

• Statutory injunction under community charter s.274
• Summary trial (rule 9-7)
• Zoning bylaw interpretation
• Freedom of association and assembly
• Interlocutory injunction
• Ultra vires

Read case analysis

Surrey (City) v. Koonar

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found a modified container on a Surrey residential lot was a shipping container under the zoning bylaw and ordered its removal within 30 days.

• Shipping container
• Bylaw enforcement
• Interpretation of bylaws
• Declaration of contravention
• Municipal-bylaw-enforcement
• Zoning

Read case analysis

Egg's Canna Franchising Ltd. v. Vancouver (City)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Judicial review of a Board of Variance ruling refusing to hear a third cannabis-store appeal as duplicative. The court found the refusal reasonable and dismissed the petition.

• Board of variance jurisdiction
• Res judicata
• Functus officio
• Issue estoppel
• Procedural fairness
• Standard of review

Read case analysis

Central Kootenay (Regional District) v. Lisanti

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted summary judgment enforcing a zoning bylaw, finding a trailer used as a residence was a prohibited recreational vehicle in the R1F zone.

• Zoning bylaw enforcement
• Declaratory relief
• Mandatory/statutory injunction
• Summary judgment (rule 9-6)
• Strike out/abuse of process (rule 9-5)
• Third party indemnity/ contribution

Read case analysis

2222868 Ontario Inc. v. Grimsby (Town)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The by-law unambiguously defines 'Works Yard' and lists it as a separate permitted use in the Utility Zone without qualification; therefore a private works yard that fits that definition is permitted in the Utility Zone. The zone name does not limit permitted uses and the absence of a qualification or accessory designation indicates the municipality did not intend to restrict the use to public or quasi-public utilities; where the by-law is clear there is no requirement to consult provincial policy instruments for interpretation.

Source excerpt

• Zoning by-law interpretation
• Permitted uses
• Official plan conformity
• Provincial policy and greenbelt plan
• Costs

Read case analysis

Thompson-Nicola (Regional District) v. Cade

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

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.

• Statutory injunction
• Non-conforming use
• Bylaw interpretation
• Short-term rentals
• Occupancy/ building permits
• Zoning-bylaw-interpretation

Read case analysis

Southside Construction Management Limited v. Ingersoll (Town)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The court upheld the application judge's interpretation that "community shopping centre" is not constrained to the defined term "shopping centre" and must be read in context with the Official Plan and the by-law as a whole; the phrase was given a contextual meaning that permits the 4,645 m2 (50,000 ft2) cap to apply without regard to a six‑unit threshold, and the provision is not void for vagueness.

Source excerpt

• Interpretation of zoning by-law
• Official plan and zoning interplay
• Definition and statutory construction
• Void for vagueness

Read case analysis

Havelock-Belmont-Methuen (Township) v. Kloosterman

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The plain definitions in the By-Law excluded recreational motor homes from s.4.31's prohibitions; absent evidence of actual habitation, mere connection to power did not establish intended human habitation; accordingly the injunction and declaration based on s.4.31 could not be sustained and the order was set aside.

Source excerpt

• By-law interpretation
• Prohibited habitation
• Injunction
• Costs

Read case analysis