Dr. Robert J. Williams

The appellant appealed a municipal by-law that revised the ward boundaries of Loyalist Township to maintain Amherst Island as a separate ward, resulting in a 77% deviation from average ward population parity.

The Tribunal found that the ward boundary review process was fair and that Amherst Island is a distinct community of interest due to its geography and reliance on a ferry.

However, the Tribunal concluded that the 77% deviation from voter parity was unreasonable and not justified by the community of interest principle, as it undermined the overarching principle of effective representation.

The appeal was allowed and the by-law was repealed.

The appellant appealed the City of Guelph's passing of a by-law to alter its six wards, arguing that the new boundaries failed to provide effective representation by population and unnecessarily divided neighbourhoods.

The City defended the by-law, relying on the extensive review process and recommendations of its expert consultants.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the by-law achieved relative population parity, respected communities of interest and natural boundaries, and was strongly endorsed by the community.

The Tribunal deferred to the reasonable decision of the elected municipal council.

The appellants appealed a municipal by-law that re-divided the municipality's wards into a four-ward model.

The municipality's consultant had provided both a four-ward and a six-ward option.

The Tribunal found that the four-ward option selected by the municipality resulted in an unacceptable deviation from voter parity (42% deviation, projected to increase to 56%) that could not be justified by the desire to keep a specific community of interest intact.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal and ordered the municipality to implement the six-ward option, which better satisfied the Carter Principles for effective representation.