2 total
Appeal dismissed; trial judge's finding that municipality acted in bad faith to block development upheld.
The respondents sought to develop land subdivided via testamentary devise, a method that bypassed Planning Act controls.
When they applied for building permits, the appellant Town delayed processing and passed an interim control by-law, followed by a zoning amendment increasing minimum lot sizes, effectively halting the development.
The trial judge found the Town acted in bad faith, quashed the zoning amendment, and ordered the issuance of building permits and damages.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings of bad faith and the order for building permits, finding no palpable and overriding error, but allowed the appeal in part to adjust the interest rate on damages and the scale of costs.
Repayment is not a precondition to statutory rescission of an accident benefits settlement.
The appeal concerned whether an insured who rescinded an accident benefits settlement under s. 9.1(4) of the Automobile Insurance Regulation had to first repay settlement funds before the rescission became effective.
The court held that the statutory rescission right was consumer protection legislation and operated upon delivery of written notice where the insurer had failed to provide the notice required by s. 9.1(2).
Repayment of funds was not a condition precedent to rescission, but the funds became immediately due and owing once rescission was effected.
The insured could therefore pursue a statutory accident benefits claim, while the insurer was entitled to an order declaring its right to repayment.
The appeal was allowed in part, with no order as to costs.
