Digest: Saskatoon (City) v Wal-Mart Canada Corp., 2019 SKCA 3

• Date: January 08, 2019

Reported as: 2019 SKCA 3

Docket Number: CA19002 , CACV 2844

Court: Court of Appeal

Date: 2019-01-08

Judges:

• Whitmore
• Jackson
• Ryan-Froslie

Subjects:

• Administrative Law � Judicial Review � Certiorari � Appeal
• Municipal Law � Assessment � Appeal � Pre-Hearing Disclosure
• Statutes � Interpretation � Cities Act, Section 223
• Statutes � Interpretation � Municipal Board Act, Section 20

Digest: The appellant, the City of Saskatoon (City), appealed the order of a Queen�s Bench judge sitting in judicial review of a decision of the Board of Revision (board) (see: 2016 SKQB 19). The respondent (Wal-Mart) had appealed the City�s 2014 assessment of its properties in Saskatoon to the board and raised a number of grounds of appeal. Prior to the hearing, Wal-Mart had requested that the director of assessment for the City provide cost records for each property under appeal, rent data used to create the assessment model and the corresponding assessed rent versus actual rent data to assist in preparing its appeal. The City responded that it could only supply the information if the board issued an order declaring the information confidential and subject to a confidentiality agreement. Wal-Mart then applied to the board requesting that it order the assessor to provide it with, among other things, the rent data used to create the Retail Non-CBD model used to assess the subject properties and a comparison of actual versus assessed rents for properties assessed with the model. It made an additional request for the actual rents for properties excluded from the model because the information pre-dated the period 2008�2010 selected for the model. Wal-Mart offered to undertake to keep the information confidential pursuant to s. 201 of the Act. The board granted the request for information relating only to a list of contract rents and building sizes for the period but denied any other information that could identify the specific properties listed and refused to grant an order for the additional information without giving its reasons. Wal-Mart did not appeal the board�s decision, but the City appealed it to the Saskatchewan Municipal Board sitting as the Assessment Appeals Committee (committee). The committee decided that it did not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the board�s decision because it had not in fact issued a decision. Wal-Mart then applied to the Court of Queen�s Bench for relief from the board�s decision pursuant to Queen�s Bench rule 3-49, arguing that it had breached its duty of fairness by failing to...