The respondent company operated a sand and gravel mine and was ordered by a development officer under the Planning Act to stop mining on a specific parcel of land and restore it.
The respondent did not appeal the order to the Development Appeal Board but failed to restore the site.
When charged with failing to comply with the order, the respondent argued by way of defence that it had a valid non-conforming use.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the trial judge lacked jurisdiction to determine the merits of the administrative order in a penal proceeding, as the Planning Act provided a comprehensive appeal mechanism that the respondent failed to utilize.
The appeal was allowed and the conviction restored.
