Cecil O. D. Branson

The appellants challenged a municipal zoning by-law that converted agricultural land to residential use, arguing that an alderman who voted on the by-law was disqualified due to a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The alderman had made public statements indicating he would not change his mind on the rezoning.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that a municipal councillor is only disqualified by bias if they have prejudged the matter to the extent of being no longer capable of persuasion.

Finding that the alderman had not closed his mind entirely, the Court dismissed the appeal.

The Crown appealed the acquittal of several motor vehicle dealers charged under the Combines Investigation Act with conspiring to lessen competition unduly by adding common freight charges and surcharges to captive automobile parts.

The trial judge found that while agreements existed, they did not unduly lessen competition.

The Court of Appeal quashed the Crown's appeal on the basis that the grounds of appeal involved questions of fact rather than law alone.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the Crown's appeal, agreeing that the trial judge's conclusions were based on factual findings and did not constitute errors of law.