The appeal concerned whether a municipality widening a road and installing a continuous centre median was required under s. 298(1) of the Municipal Act to provide another means of access to a commercial property whose direct left-turn access was restricted but not entirely eliminated.
The court held that s. 298(1) applies only where the effect of the by-law is to deprive the landowner of the only means of ingress and egress to the highway.
A mere limitation on access, even if commercially significant, does not trigger the statutory right to alternate access.
The respondents' remedy was confined to compensation for injurious affection under the Expropriations Act.
The appeal was allowed and the declaratory relief was set aside.
