The applicant municipality and chief building official sought an interlocutory injunction to restrain the respondents from operating an addiction recovery centre on their property.
The applicants argued the property was not zoned for institutional use, while the respondents claimed the facility qualified as a permitted 'Lodge' or 'Resort'.
Applying the modified RJR MacDonald test for public authorities, the court found a strong prima facie case that the use breached the zoning by-law, as the facility's primary purpose was health and welfare, not catering to the vacationing public.
The interlocutory injunction was granted.
