The appellants sought access to the back of their property across a grassy strip of city-owned land bordering a cul-de-sac.
The city council denied the request.
The application judge ruled the appellants had no right of access but found the city's process was tainted by bad faith and ordered a new hearing.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the finding that the grassy strip was not part of the public road, dismissing the appellants' appeal.
The Court allowed the city's cross-appeal, finding the application judge misapprehended the evidence and improperly applied adjudicative procedural fairness standards to an elected municipal council.
