The applicant challenged the legality of a municipal by-law that prohibited charging fees for visitor parking at residential apartment buildings, arguing the municipality lacked jurisdiction and a planning rationale.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the power to pass pay parking prohibition by-laws is necessarily implied from the express power to restrict land use under section 34(1) of the Planning Act.
The court also accepted the respondent's expert evidence that the prohibition was enacted in the context of planning policy and rejected the argument that the by-law improperly discriminated between commercial and residential landlords.
