Saint John (City) v. Galbraith Construction Ltd., (1993) 134 N.B.R.(2d) 330 (PC)

• Judge: Brien, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: January 15, 1993
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (1993), 134 N.B.R.(2d) 330 (PC)

Saint John v. Galbraith Constr. (1993), 134 N.B.R.(2d) 330 (PC);

    134 R.N.-B.(2e) 330; 342 A.P.R. 330

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

City of Saint John v. Galbraith Construction Ltd.

Indexed As: Saint John (City) v. Galbraith Construction Ltd.

New Brunswick Provincial Court

Brien, P.C.J.

January 15, 1993.

Summary:

The defendant company was charged with committing an offence under s. 95(1) of the Community Planning Act, by contravening a provision of the Zoning Bylaw of the City of Saint John. At the conclusion of the city's case, the defendant moved for dismissal of the information, arguing that the city failed to prove that the information was laid by a person authorized to do so under s. 98 of the Community Planning Act.

The New Brunswick Provincial Court dismissed the motion.

Municipal Law - Topic 3992

Bylaws - Enforcement of prosecution - Information or charge - The Community Planning Act required proceedings for offences under the Act to be commenced by a person designated for that purpose by the Minister or Council - A defendant charged, on the information of Burton Steeves, with committing an offence under the Act by contravening the Saint John Zoning Bylaw, moved to dismiss the in­formation, arguing that it was not laid by a person authorized to do so - Saint John Council had authorized Steeves, pursuant to s. 14 of the Police Act and s. 101 of the Municipalities Act, to lay informations for breaches of the Zoning Bylaw - The New Brunswick Provincial Court dismissed the defendant's motion stating that "the test ... is one of substantial compliance ... to ensure that the Council addressed the matter and authorized a person to take proceedings" - See paragraph 38.

Cases Noticed:

Rockwood, Re (1974), 9 N.B.R.(2d) 250; 1 A.P.R. 250 (Q.B.), consd. [paras. 11, 27, 28, 29].

R. v. Chase (1981), 34 N.B.R.(2d) 690; 85 A.P.R. 690 (T.D.), consd. [paras. 12, 13, 16].

R. v. Hovey (1987), 76 N.B.R.(2d) 153; 192 A.P.R. 153 (C.A.), consd. [paras. 14, 15, 16, 36].

R. v. Limerick; ex parte Murphy (1921), 37 C.C.C. 344; 49 N.B.R. 280; 69 D.L.R. 441 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 15, 37].

R. v. Ed (1926), 47 C.C.C. 196; 53 N.B.R. 387 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. McNeill, [1924] 3 D.L.R. 53; 42 C.C.C. 158 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [paras. 15, 37].

R. v. Yarish, [1926] 3 W.W.R. 586; 47 C.C.C. 51 (Man. Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 15].

Hoddinott v. Nickerson and Underhill (1983), 46 N.B.R.(2d) 340; 121 A.P.R. 340; 22 M.P.L.R. 127; 145 D.L.R.(3d) 368 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 25].

Parkdale (Corporation) v. West et al. (1887), 12 App. Cas. 602, refd to. [para. 25].

Norfolk (Municipality) v. Roberts (1913), 28 O.L.R. 593; 13 D.L.R. 463, affd. 50 S.C.R. 283; 23 D.L.R. 547, refd to. [paras. 21, 25].

Edmonton (City) v. Tegon Developments Ltd. et al. (1977), 8 A.R. 384; 81 D.L.R.(3d) 543 (C.A.), affd. 24 N.R. 269; 121 D.L.R.(3d) 760 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 25].

Quispamsis (Village) v. Truan et al. (1975), 12 N.B.R.(2d) 158; 10 A.P.R. 158 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 27].

Mowat v. Steeves (1981), 34 N.B.R.(2d) 338; 85 A.P.R. 338; 122 D.L.R.(3d) 81 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 27, 30].

Grand Falls (Town) v. Bourgoin (1990), 109 N.B.R.(2d) 178; 273 A.P.R. 178 (T.D.), refd to. [paras. 27, 30].

Dieppe (Town) v. King (1987), 36 M.P.L.R. 118 (N.B.Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 29, 30].

Quispamsis (Town) v. Boudreau, [1989] N.B.J. No. 932, refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Faust Transvision Ltd., [1966] 4 C.C.C. 356; 57 D.L.R.(2d) 84 (N.B. C.A.), consd. [paras. 33, 34, 35].

Statutes Noticed:

Community Planning Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. C-12, sect. 98 [para. 2].

Municipalities Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. M-22, sect. 101 [para. 6].

Counsel:

John L. Nugent and Bernard A. Cullinan, for the City of Saint John;

Henrik G. Tonning and Stephen F. Horgan, for Galbraith Construction Ltd.

This motion was heard before Brien, P.C.J., of the New Brunswick Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on January 15, 1993.