Buchanan v. Lakeland No. 521 (Rural Municipality), 2005 SKCA 42

• Judge: Sherstobitoff, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: March 09, 2005
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2005 SKCA 42;(2005), 257 Sask.R. 252 (CA)

Buchanan v. Lakeland No. 521 (2005), 257 Sask.R. 252 (CA);

    342 W.A.C. 252

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2005] Sask.R. TBEd. MY.011

Teana Buchanan (prospective appellant/appellant) v. Rural Municipality of Lakeland No. 521 (prospective respondent/respondent)

(No. 1068; 2005 SKCA 42)

Indexed As: Buchanan v. Lakeland No. 521 (Rural Municipality)

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Sherstobitoff, J.A.

March 21, 2005.

Summary:

The Director of Community Planning, Department of Government Relations and Aboriginal Affairs, refused to approve an application for subdivision under the 1983 Planning Development Act because it did not conform with a zoning bylaw. The applicant appealed, asserting that the application should have been examined and approved under the terms of various contracts, orders-in-council and legislation that predated the 1983 Act. The Planning Appeals Committee of the Saskatchewan Municipal Board held that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the effects of contracts, orders-in-council and legislation in effect prior to the 1983 Act. The Committee concluded that the applicant had not met the criteria set out in ss. 151(1) and 151(1.1) of the 1983 Act that would entitle her to have the appeal allowed. The applicant applied for leave to appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, per Sherstobitoff, J.A., dismissed the application. The Appeals Committee was the wrong forum in which to pursue the claim.

Land Regulation - Topic 2716

Land use control - Subdivision control - Subdivision applications - Appeals or judicial review - The Director of Community Planning refused to approve an application for subdivision under the 1983 Planning Development Act because it did not conform with a zoning bylaw - The applicant appealed, asserting that the application should have been examined and approved under prior legislation and the terms of various contracts, an order-in-council and a Ministerial order, all of which predated the 1983 Act - The Planning Appeals Committee of the Saskatchewan Municipal Board concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the effects of contracts, orders-in-council and legislation in effect prior to the 1983 Act - The Committee dismissed the appeal - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, per Sherstobitoff, J.A., denied leave to appeal - The Committee derived its powers from the 1983 Act - That Act contemplated that the Committee would deal with matters arising out of the 1983 Act and related legislation and not with the above matters which were beyond the Act's purview.

Land Regulation - Topic 4125

Land use control - Statutory appeals - Jurisdiction of appeal board - [See Land Regulation - Topic 2716 ].

Cases Noticed:

Paziuk v. Director of Community Planning (Sask.) (1977), 78 Sask.R. 221 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Counsel:

Ron Cherkewich, for the prospective appellant;

Ajay Krishan, for the prospective respondent;

Ray Petrich, Director of Community Planning;

Herbert Wellman, Chairman, Planning Appeals Committee.

Sherstobitoff, J.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, heard this application on March 9, 2005, and delivered the following judgment on March 21, 2005.