2 total
Application for judicial review dismissed; transitional regulation governing planning appeals found to be intra vires.
The applicants sought judicial review to quash O. Reg. 382/19, which amended transitional rules for planning appeals before the Ontario Land Tribunal, arguing it was ultra vires its enabling statute.
The regulation reimposed a more restrictive procedural regime on third-party appeals of municipal planning decisions.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the Attorney General had broad, express statutory authority under s. 43.1 of the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017 to make the transitional regulation.
The court held the regulation was consistent with the enabling statute and did not improperly deprive the applicants of vested substantive rights.
The court also declined to address procedural fairness issues, finding them premature as they should be raised in the applicants' pending motion for leave to appeal.
Application for legal non-conforming use and motion for civil contempt both dismissed.
The applicants sought a declaration of a legal non-conforming use for outdoor storage and business operations on their property, arguing the use was lawful under a 1984 zoning by-law.
The court dismissed the application, finding the use was not lawful under the by-law as it was not a home-based business occupying less than 25% of the floor area and involved the prohibited storage of goods.
The respondent municipality brought a motion for civil contempt against the applicants for breaching a 1994 order prohibiting the dumping of fill on the property.
The court dismissed the contempt motion, exercising its discretion not to make a finding of contempt because the applicants genuinely believed the fill was being offered by the municipality for a road project.
