2 total
A golf course is a structure under section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act, allowing its owner to apply for demolition.
The Town of Oakville sought to designate Glen Abbey golf course as a cultural heritage property.
Clublink, the owner, applied under section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act to demolish and remove the golf course.
The Town argued the application should proceed under section 33, which provides different procedural protections and appeal routes.
The central issue was whether a golf course constitutes a "structure" within the meaning of section 34.
The Court of Appeal held that Glen Abbey, being a product of significant construction and engineering comprising constituent parts intended to remain permanently on the property, was a structure within section 34.
The purposive and contextual interpretation of the statute, considering its legislative history and the evolution of municipal heritage planning beyond a "building-centric" paradigm, supported this conclusion.
The court largely dismissed a motion to compel production of an expert's preliminary memos, finding them irrelevant to the expert's independence.
The applicant, the Town of Oakville, brought a motion to compel the respondents, Clublink Corporation ULC and Clublink Holdings Limited, to answer certain questions and produce documents refused during cross-examinations of their expert witnesses.
The motion concerned the interpretation of section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act in the context of the Glen Abbey golf course redevelopment.
The court dismissed most of the applicant's requests, finding the documents irrelevant to the narrow issues or the expert's independence.
However, it ordered the production of any separate written retainer agreement for a heritage impact assessment, if such an agreement existed, deeming it marginally relevant to the expert's independence.
The court also addressed and admonished counsel for an improper ex parte communication made after the motion hearing concluded.
