On an appeal from an application judgment concerning a non-profit airport authority's refusal to appoint a municipal nominee as member and director, the court upheld the declaration that the board acted contrary to its by-law.
The appeal turned on whether the board had clear and unambiguous evidence that the nominee would not at all times act in the authority's best interests.
The court held that neither the nominee's cautious interview answers nor the board's adverse credibility finding based on his subsequent letter could reasonably satisfy that stringent anticipatory standard.
The board's rejection of the nomination therefore fell outside the scope of its authority under the by-law, and the appeal was dismissed with costs.
