The plaintiffs sued the defendant municipality for negligence and nuisance, alleging that a replacement culvert installed by the municipality caused flooding that damaged their buildings.
The buildings were constructed on the municipality's shore road allowance pursuant to building permits issued decades earlier.
The court found that the new culvert was not the cause of the flooding, as the property had a history of flooding prior to its installation.
Furthermore, the court held that the municipality did not owe a private law duty of care to prevent flooding on its own land, and its decision not to undertake further hydrological studies was a protected policy decision.
The action was dismissed.
