44 total
Statutory requirement to prove wind turbines cause 'serious harm to human health' does not violate Charter section 7.
The appellants, residents living near three proposed wind turbine farms, appealed decisions of the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) that confirmed the Director's issuance of Renewable Energy Approvals (REAs) for the projects.
The appellants argued that the statutory test requiring them to prove the projects would cause 'serious harm to human health' violated section 7 of the Charter.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeals, finding that the statutory test aligned with the jurisprudential threshold for section 7 claims and did not depart from the consensus scientific view on wind turbines.
The Court also upheld the ERT's treatment of lay witness evidence, its finding that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Director's REA issuance process for Charter compliance, and its discretionary decisions denying adjournments.
Appeal dismissed; application judge properly declined Charter application where issue was already before Provincial Offences Appeal Court.
The appellant appealed a decision of the Superior Court of Justice declining to entertain its s. 24(1) Charter application based on post-trial delay.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the application judge's exercise of discretion, as the appellant had already raised the s. 11(b) Charter issue in an appeal to the Provincial Offences Appeal Court under the Provincial Offences Act.
Motion to quash granted; Ministry's completeness check of renewable energy application is not subject to judicial review.
The moving party, Windlectric Inc., proposed a wind energy project on Amherst Island.
The Ministry of the Environment deemed the application complete, initiating the technical review phase.
The responding party, an association opposing the project, sought judicial review to quash the completeness determination, arguing the application lacked an adequate emergency response plan.
Windlectric brought a motion to quash the application for judicial review.
The Divisional Court granted the motion, finding that a completeness check is an administrative step, not a statutory power of decision or a matter subject to public law remedies.
The court also held that the application for judicial review was premature, as the administrative process and available appeals had not been exhausted.
Appeal of Environmental Review Tribunal decision striking constitutional question and denying public interest standing dismissed.
The Municipality of North Middlesex appealed two decisions of the Environmental Review Tribunal regarding a Renewable Energy Approval under the Environmental Protection Act.
The Tribunal had struck the Municipality's Notice of Constitutional Question and refused to grant it public interest standing.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Tribunal correctly applied the law, did not err in principle, and provided compelling reasons.