The applicants sought judicial review of the respondent municipality's refusal to process their application to close and purchase an unopened road allowance abutting their waterfront property.
The applicants alleged procedural unfairness and bad faith, claiming the municipality favoured their neighbours' competing application and failed to prevent unauthorized alterations to the land.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the municipality's decision to refuse the sale until the competing interests of all abutting owners were resolved was reasonable.
The court concluded there was no legal right to compel the municipality to sell the road allowance and found no evidence of bad faith.
