Queen's Square Neighbourhood Association Inc. et al. v. Fredericton (City) et al., 2001 NBQB 257

• Judge: Glennie, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: October 05, 2001
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: 2001 NBQB 257;[2001] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 100 (TD)

Queen's Square v. F'ton, [2001] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 100 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[English language version only]

[Version en langue anglaise seulement]

Temp. Cite: [2001] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) TBEd. DE.027

Renvoi temp.: [2001] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) TBEd. DE.027

Queen's Square Neighbourhood Association Inc. and Fredericton Trails Coalition Inc. (applicant) v. City of Fredericton, a municipality of the Province of New Brunswick and Alfred Brown and Robert Brown (respondents)

(F/M/67/01; 2001 NBQB 257)

Indexed As: Queen's Square Neighbourhood Association Inc. et al. v. Fredericton (City) et al.

Répertorié: Queen's Square Neighbourhood Association Inc. et al. v. Fredericton (City) et al.

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Fredericton

Glennie, J.

December 13, 2001.

Summary:

Résumé:

In 1995, the city acquired "railway lands" from the C.N.R. A portion of those lands (Parcel A) was zoned Park. Developers requested that two properties, including Parcel A, be rezoned to permit an apartment building. On the recommendation of city staff, Parcel A, being adjacent to the devel­opers' lands, was sold to the developers to permit a larger apartment complex to be constructed. City council passed a bylaw rezoning Parcel A. Two community groups applied to quash the amending bylaw, sub­mitting that it was illegal where it was passed without first amending the Municipal Plan. The groups also alleged a technical defect in the bylaw, submitting that although the amending bylaw was read in its entirety, there was no third reading by title as required by s. 12 of the Municipalities Act.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dismissed the appli­cation. The amending bylaw was valid. There was no need to amend the Municipal Plan. The amending bylaw did not conflict with the policies of the Municipal Plan and, even if it did, the Municipal Plan had suffi­cient flexibility to accommodate such a conflict. The procedural defect did not in­validate the amending bylaw. Proper notice had been given, no one was prejudiced and council acted fairly, judicially and in good faith, and listened to both sides. Strict com­pliance with procedure was not required. There was substantial compliance with s. 12 of the Municipalities Act and that was suffi­cient.

Land Regulation - Topic 2141

Land use control - Municipal plan - Amendments - General - In 1995, the city acquired "railway lands" from the C.N.R. - A portion of those lands (Parcel A) was zoned Park - Developers requested that two properties, including Parcel A, be rezoned to permit an apartment building - On the recommendation of city staff, Par­cel A, being adjacent to the developers' lands, was sold to the developers to permit a larger apartment complex to be con­structed - City council passed a bylaw rezoning Parcel A - Two community groups applied to quash the amending bylaw, submitting that it was illegal where it was passed without first amending the Municipal Plan - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dismissed the appli­cation - The amending bylaw was valid - There was no need to amend the Municipal Plan - The amending bylaw did not con­flict with the policies of the Municipal Plan and, even if it did, the Municipal Plan had sufficient flexibility to accommodate such a conflict - See para­graphs 9 to 53.

Land Regulation - Topic 2604.2

Land use control - Zoning bylaws - Enactment and interpretation - Amend­ment of bylaw - [See Land Regulation - Topic 2141 ].

Land Regulation - Topic 2620.1

Land use control - Zoning bylaws - Enactment and interpretation - Rezoning application - Procedure - In 1995, the city acquired "railway lands" from the C.N.R. - A portion of those lands (Parcel A) was zoned Park - Developers requested that two properties, including Parcel A, be rezoned to permit an apartment building - On the recommendation of city staff, Par­cel A, being adjacent to the developers' lands, was sold to the developers to permit a larger apartment complex to be con­structed - City council passed a bylaw rezoning Parcel A - Two community groups applied to quash the amending bylaw, submitting that there was a techni­cal defect in the bylaw, where although the amending bylaw was read in its entirety, there was no third reading by title as required by s. 12 of the Municipalities Act - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dismissed the appli­cation - The amending bylaw was valid - The pro­cedural defect did not invalidate the amending bylaw - Proper notice had been given, no one was prejudiced and council acted fairly, judicially and in good faith, and listened to both sides - Strict compli­ance with procedure was not required - There was substantial compli­ance with s. 12 of the Municipalities Act and that was sufficient - See paragraphs 54 to 74.

Municipal Law - Topic 3467

Bylaws - Amendment or variation - Zon­ing bylaws - [See Land Regulation - Topic 2620.1 ].

Municipal Law - Topic 3850

Bylaws - Quashing bylaws - Grounds for judicial interference - Noncompliance (cf. imperfect compliance) - [See Land Regu­lation - Topic 2620.1 ].

Aménagement et urbanisme - Cote 2141

Contrôle de l'utilisation des sols - Plan municipal - Modification - Généralitiés - [Voir Land Regulation - Topic 2141 ].

Aménagement et urbanisme - Cote 2604.2

Contrôle de l'utilisation des sols - Arrêtés de zonage - Adoption et interprétation - Modification de l'arrêté - [Voir Land Regulation - Topic 2604.2 ].

Aménagement et urbanisme - Cote 2620.1

Contrôle de l'utilisation des sols - Arrêtés de zonage - Adoption et interprétation - Demande de rezonage - Procédure - [Voir Land Regulation - Topic 2620.1 ].

Droit municipal - Cote 3467

Arrêtés - Modification - Arrêté de zonage - [Voir Municipal Law - Topic 3467 ].

Droit municipal - Cote 3850

Arrêtés - Annulation - Motifs d'inter­vention judicaire - Inobservation - [Voir Munici­pal Law - Topic 3850 ].

Cases Noticed:

Harvie and Gray v. Alberta et al. (1981), 31 A.R. 612 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Rogers et al. v. Saanich (District) (1983), 146 D.L.R.(3d) 475 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 19].

Prosser v. Fredericton (City) (1999), 222 N.B.R.(2d) 278; 570 A.P.R. 278 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 23].

Atlantic Wholesalers Ltd. v. Douglas Group Holdings Inc. et al. (1990), 111 N.B.R.(2d) 225; 277 A.P.R. 225 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 26].

Stone v. H.J. Hotels Limited Partnership et al. (2001), 243 N.B.R.(2d) 50; 243 R.N.-B.(2e) 50; 631 A.P.R. 50 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 42].

Oley and Moffatt v. Fredericton (City) (1983), 50 N.B.R.(2d) 157; 131 A.P.R. 157 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 45].

Martin v. Victoria (City) (1980), 13 M.P.L.R. 150; 114 D.L.R.(3d) 87 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 45].

Dexter Construction Co. v. Saint John (City) (1982), 35 N.B.R.(2d) 217; 88 A.P.R. 217 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 50].

Irving Oil Ltd. v. Petro-Canada Inc. and Daly et al. (1987), 83 N.B.R.(2d) 416; 212 A.P.R. 416 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 51].

Oley and Moffatt v. Fredericton (City) (1984), 57 N.B.R.(2d) 361; 148 A.P.R. 361 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

Oley and Moffatt v. Fredericton (City) (1984), 54 N.B.R.(2d) 418; 140 A.P.R. 418 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 69].

Huson v. South Norwich (1892), 19 O.A.R. 343 (C.A.), affd. (1892), 21 S.C.R. 669, refd to. [para. 70].

Wiswell v. Winnipeg (City), [1965] S.C.R. 512, refd to. [para. 71].

Ridge v. Baldwin, [1963] 3 All E.R. 66, refd to. [para. 72].

Shilleto Drug Co. v. Hanna, [1931] 3 D.L.R. 567, refd to. [para. 73].

Statutes Noticed:

Municipalities Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. M-22, sect. 27 [para. 24].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Rogers, Ian MacFee, The Law of Canadian Municipal Corporations (2nd Ed.), para. 72.1 [para. 65].

Counsel:

Ray W. Dixon, Q.C., and Brendan R. Hubley, for the Queen's Square Neigh­bourhood Association Inc. and Fredericton Trails Coalition Inc.;

Bruce A. Noble and James D. Yerxa, for the City of Fredericton;

David Eidt and Steven Christie, for Alfred Brown and Robert Brown.

This application was heard on October 5, 2001, before Glennie, J., of the New Bruns­wick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Divi­sion, Judicial District of Fredericton, who delivered the following judgment on De­cember 13, 2001.