Langford (City) v. dos Reis, 2016 BCCA 201

• Judge: Donald, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: February 15, 2016
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: 2016 BCCA 201;(2016), 387 B.C.A.C. 43 (CA)

Langford v. dos Reis (2016), 387 B.C.A.C. 43 (CA);

    668 W.A.C. 43

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] B.C.A.C. TBEd. MY.017

City of Langford (appellant/petitioner) v. Marlene Alina Lima dos Reis (respondent/respondent)

(CA41846; 2016 BCCA 201)

Indexed As: Langford (City) v. dos Reis

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Donald, J.A.

May 12, 2016.

Summary:

The City of Langford alleged that an accessory building on the respondent's property was located too close to her property line. The City contended that the applicable bylaw required the building to be setback 6 metres. The chambers judge agreed with the respondent that the applicable setback was 1 metre. The City appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, in a decision reported at [2015] B.C.A.C. Uned. 11, set aside the order below, concluding that the bylaw required a 6 metre setback. The Court ordered that the respondent remove the accessory building within 60 days. The respondent did not remove the building. The City granted extensions of time. The respondent made a number of unsuccessful variance applications to "reduce setbacks to construct an accessory building". The City applied for a declaration of contempt, a fine of $2,000 to $4,000, and special costs. The respondent's position was that her intent was to save the building, not to breach the order.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Donald, J.A., found that civil contempt had been made out. The Court granted the declaration but directed that the penalty be determined at a separate phase to provide the respondent with an opportunity to purge her contempt and thereby "she might mitigate the penalty significantly."

Contempt - Topic 505

What constitutes contempt - General principles - Civil contempt - See paragraph 20.

Contempt - Topic 684

What constitutes contempt - Judgments and orders - Disobedience of or non-compliance with - See paragraphs 21 to 25.

Counsel:

T.J. DeSouza, for the appellant;

K.T. Karaszkiewicz, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard at Victoria, British Columbia, on February 15, 2016, before Donald, J.A., in Chambers, of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Written submissions were received on March 9, March 31 and April 7, 2016. The Court delivered the following judgment at Vancouver, British Columbia, on May 12, 2016.