The respondents brought a motion to strike portions of an affidavit filed by the applicant in an application seeking to quash a municipal by-law under the City of Toronto Act.
The court had previously struck portions of an earlier affidavit for containing irrelevant historical allegations and improper innuendo about prior municipal actions.
On the renewed motion, the respondents argued the revised affidavit continued to include irrelevant references to earlier by-laws and municipal initiatives.
The court held that most of the objectionable material had been sufficiently sanitized and could remain as factual background potentially relevant to the issues, including whether the impugned by-law conferred a prohibited bonus.
However, one paragraph expressing the deponent’s concerns about public funds used in 2000 was struck as irrelevant.
