Denman Island Local Trust Committee v. 4064 Investments Ltd., (2001) 161 B.C.A.C. 215 (CA)

• Judge: Rowles, Saunders and Proudfoot, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: December 19, 2001
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (2001), 161 B.C.A.C. 215 (CA);2001 BCCA 736

Denman Island Local Trust v. 4064 Inv. (2001), 161 B.C.A.C. 215 (CA);

    263 W.A.C. 215

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] B.C.A.C. TBEd. DE.055

Denman Island Local Trust Committee (plaintiff/appellant) v. 4064 Investments Ltd. (defendant/respondent)

(CA027920; 2001 BCCA 736)

Indexed As: Denman Island Local Trust Committee v. 4064 Investments Ltd.

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Rowles, Saunders and Proudfoot, JJ.A.

December 19, 2001.

Summary:

The plaintiff brought an action to enjoin the defendant from removing, without a permit, trees on parts of the defendant's lands on Denman Island in contravention of five amending bylaws passed by the plaintiff. The defendant applied under rule 18A to dismiss the plaintiff's claim.

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at [2000] B.C.T.C. 842, allowed the application and dismissed the plaintiff's action, holding that the five amending bylaws were not within the legislative competence of the plaintiff. The court made a declaratory order that the five bylaws were invalid. The plaintiff appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, Rowles, J.A., dissenting, allowed the appeal in part. The court dismissed the appeal respecting bylaw 113. The court set aside the order declaring bylaws 110, 111, 112 and 114 invalid and remitted the issue of their validity to the Supreme Court.

Forests and Forest Products - Topic 2405

Forest regulation - General - Private lands - Forest management - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that the local government on Denman Island (the Denman Island Local Trust Committee) did not have the statutory authority to regulate the cutting or removal of trees on private lands on Denman Island - The court held that ss. 879(1)(a) and 920(7) of the Local Government Act, when read together in context, did not give the Committee the power to enact bylaws restricting and regulating the felling of trees on private lands - The court affirmed that one bylaw was beyond the scope of the Committee's powers, but referred the validity of four other bylaws to the Supreme Court - See paragraphs 63 to 89.

Municipal Law - Topic 3726

Bylaws - Construction or interpretation - General - The British Columbia Court of Appeal stated that municipal statutes should be given a broad and purposive interpretation, although a "somewhat stricter rule of construction" was in order where the municipality was attempting to use a power which restricted common law or civil rights - See paragraph 75.

Municipal Law - Topic 3776

Bylaws - Scope of - Private lands - Forest management - [See Forests and Forest Products - Topic 2405 ].

Municipal Law - Topic 3842

Bylaws - Quashing bylaws - Grounds for judicial interference - Ultra vires - [See Forests and Forest Products - Topic 2405 ].

Municipal Law - Topic 3860

Bylaws - Quashing bylaws - Grounds for judicial interference - Unauthorized by empowering statute - [See Forests and Forest Products - Topic 2405 ].

Real Property - Topic 7262

Easements, licences and prescriptive rights - Profits à prendre - What constitutes - The British Columbia Court of Appeal stated that trees were included within the general definition of a profit à prendre - See paragraph 79.

Cases Noticed:

MacMillan Bloedel Ltd. v. Galiano Island Trust Committee et al. (1995), 63 B.C.A.C. 81; 104 W.A.C. 81; 126 D.L.R.(4th) 449; 10 B.C.L.R.(3d) 121; 28 M.P.L.R.(2d) 157 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1996), 203 N.R. 390; 78 B.C.A.C. 240; 128 W.A.C. 240 (S.C.C.), consd. [paras. 6, 66].

Pacific National Investments Ltd. v. Victoria (City) et al., [2000] 2 S.C.R. 919; 263 N.R. 1; 144 B.C.A.C. 203; 236 W.A.C. 203, refd to. [paras. 43, 75].

R. v. McIntosh (B.B.), [1995] 1 S.C.R. 686; 178 N.R. 161; 79 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 46].

Board of Education of School District No. 43 (Coquitlam) v. Clement et al. (1999), 119 B.C.A.C. 99; 194 W.A.C. 99; 170 D.L.R.(4th) 107; 64 B.C.L.R.(3d) 199 (C.A.), consd. [para. 51].

Coquitlam School District No. 43 v. T.W.D. - see Board of Education of School District No. 43 (Coquitlam) v. Clement et al.

Nanaimo (City) v. Rascal Trucking Ltd. et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 342; 251 N.R. 42; 132 B.C.A.C. 298; 215 W.A.C. 298; 183 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [paras. 56, 75].

R. v. Sharma (D.), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 650; 149 N.R. 161; 61 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 73].

114957 Canada ltée (Spraytech, Société d'arrosage) et al. v. Hudson (Town) (2001), 271 N.R. 201; 200 D.L.R.(4th) 419 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 73].

R. v. Greenbaum (M.), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 674; 149 N.R. 114; 61 O.A.C. 241; 100 D.L.R.(4th) 183, refd to. [para. 75].

Hamilton (City) v. Hamilton Distillery Co. (1907), 38 S.C.R. 239, refd to. [para. 75].

Statutes Noticed:

Islands Trust Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 239, sect. 3 [para. 8]; sect. 4 [para. 9]; sect. 29(1)(a) [para. 10].

Local Government Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 323, sect. 879(1), sect. 920(1)(d), sect. 920(7)(b) [para. 14]; sect. 923 [para. 42].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Côté, Pierre-André, The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada (3rd Ed. 2000), p. 482 [para. 75].

Driedger, Elmer A., Construction of Statutes (2nd Ed. 1983), p. 87 [para. 76].

Counsel:

Barry S. Williamson and Francesca V. Marzari, for the appellant;

Brent R. Lokash and James W. Millar, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on April 23, 2001, at Vancouver, British Columbia, before Rowles, Saunders and Proudfoot, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered on December 19, 2001, when the following opinions were filed:

Rowles, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 1 to 62;

Saunders, J.A. (Proudfoot, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 63 to 89.