Ian Godfrey

The appellant cement manufacturer proposed substituting alternative fuel derived from post-recycling and post-composting materials for conventional fossil fuel.

The respondent municipality argued this constituted a new land use as a 'waste disposal area' under its zoning by-law, requiring an amendment.

The application judge agreed with the municipality.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the productive use of these materials as fuel in an existing cement manufacturing process does not constitute dumping, destroying, or storing waste, and therefore does not create a new land use.

The appellant employee and respondent employer entered into a framework agreement containing four sub-agreements to resolve various disputes.

The employer breached the employment sub-agreement by terminating the employee, who then sued for wrongful dismissal and claimed the entire framework agreement was voided.

The motion judge granted summary judgment for wrongful dismissal but held the sub-agreements were severable, dismissing the employee's claims under the other sub-agreements and staying execution of the wrongful dismissal judgment pending the employer's counterclaim.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the conclusion that the sub-agreements were independent and severable, nor in the discretionary decision to grant a stay.