Bruce v. Ont. (1998), 112 O.A.C. 68 (CA)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [1998] O.A.C. TBEd. SE.016
The Corporation of the Township of Bruce and the Corporation of the Village of Tiverton (applicants/appellants) v. Minister of Municipal Affairs And Housing for Ontario, the Corporation of the County of Bruce, the Corporation of the Town of Kincardine, the Corporation of the Township of Kincardine, the Corporation of the Township of St. Edmunds, the Corporation of the Township of Lindsay, the Corporation of the Township of Eastnor, the Corporation of the Village of Lions’ Head, the Corporation of the Township of Albemarle, the Corporation of the Township of Amabel, the Corporation of the Town of Wiarton, the Corporation of the Village of Hepworth, the Corporation of the Township of Arran, the Corporation of the Township of Elderslie, the Corporation of the Town of Chesley, the Corporation of the Village of Tara, the Corporation of the Village of Paisley, the Corporation of the Township of Greenock, the Corporation of the Township of Brant, the Corporation of the Town of Walkerton, the Corporation of the Township of Carrick, the Corporation of the Township of Culross, the Corporation of the Village of Mildmay, the Corporation of the Village of Teeswater, the Corporation of the Township of Saugeen, the Corporation of the Town of Southampton, the Corporation of the Town of Port Elgin, the Corporation of the Township of Huron, the Corporation of the Township of Kinloss, the Corporation of the Village of Lucknow (respondents)
(C29880)
Indexed As: Bruce (Township) et al. v. Ontario (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing) et al.
Ontario Court of Appeal
Finlayson, Osborne and Weiler, JJ.A.
September 4, 1998.
Summary:
The municipal council for the County of Bruce (the Council) adopted a restructuring plan under which the 30 existing municipal corporations in the county would be reduced to eight. The Township of Bruce and Village of Tiverton, two municipalities in the County, applied for judicial review seeking to set aside the Council’s resolution to approve the restructuring plan. The applicants argued, inter alia, that the Council failed to consider the restructuring principles established by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing under s. 25.4 of the Municipal Act.
The Ontario Court (General Division), in a decision reported at 54 O.T.C. 189, dismissed the application. The applicants appealed.
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
Municipal Law – Topic 8406
Amalgamation – General – Considerations – The municipal council for the County of Bruce (the Council) adopted a restructuring plan under which the 30 existing municipal corporations in the county would be reduced to eight – The Township of Bruce and Village of Tiverton, two municipalities in the County, applied for judicial review seeking to set aside the Council’s resolution to approve the restructuring plan – The applicants argued that the Council failed to consider the restructuring principles established by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing under s. 25.4 of the Municipal Act – A motions judge dismissed the application – The applicants appealed – The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal – A review of the record supported the conclusion that the Council did consider the relevant principles.
Cases Noticed:
Newfoundland Telephone Co. v. Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities (Nfld.) (1992), 134 N.R. 241; 95 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 271; 301 A.P.R. 271; 4 Admin. L.R.(2d) 121 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 50].
Old St. Boniface Residents Association Inc. v. Winnipeg (City) et al., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1170; 116 N.R. 46; 69 Man.R.(2d) 134; 75 D.L.R.(4th) 385, refd to. [para. 50].
Save Richmond Farmland Society et al. v. Richmond (Township) et al., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1213; 116 N.R. 68; 52 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145; 2 M.P.L.R.(2d) 288, refd to. [para. 50].
Statutes Noticed:
Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M-45, sect. 25.4 [para. 9].
Counsel:
Burton H. Kellock, Q.C. and Robert Maisey, for the appellants;
Andrew J. Roman, for the respondent, Minister of Municipal Affairs;
Robert G. Doumani and William A. Chalmers, for the respondent, Corp. of the County of Bruce;
Darrell N. Hawreliak, for the Town of Kincardine;
James A. Smith, for the Township of Kincardine.
This appeal was heard on August 5, 1998, before Finlayson, Osborne and Weiler, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The following judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Osborne, J.A., and was released on September 4, 1998.
