Fasken Martineau Dumoulin LLP

In an appeal concerning adverse possession of municipal parkland, the appellants sought possessory title to a fenced portion of backyard land registered to the municipality.

The majority held that recognizing a common law immunity for municipal parkland would conflict with Ontario’s statutory scheme under the Real Property Limitations Act and related legislation, which preserves matured possessory claims unless a statutory exception applies.

Because the statutory test for adverse possession was satisfied and no applicable statutory immunity barred the claim, the municipality’s title had been extinguished.

The appeal was allowed and the appellants were entitled to fee simple title to the disputed land.

The defendant was charged with two counts under the Niagara Parks Act, Regulation 829: disturbing other persons and using abusive or insulting language that unnecessarily interfered with the use and enjoyment of the park.

The charges arose from the defendant's conduct at Grand View Plaza in Niagara Falls on August 2, 2016, where he displayed a sign with profane political commentary and engaged in loud, aggressive, and profane interactions with park visitors and police officers.

The defendant raised a Charter s.2(b) freedom of expression defense and sought to stay the charges based on a prior Superior Court decision.

The court dismissed the first count as lacking statutory foundation but convicted on the second count, finding that the defendant's conduct constituted abusive and insulting language that unnecessarily interfered with park visitors' enjoyment and caused an overtly manifested disturbance.