Toronto Transit Commission et al. v. Toronto (City) et al., (1990) 42 O.A.C. 20 (DC)

• Judge: O'Brien, J.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: October 16, 1990
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1990), 42 O.A.C. 20 (DC)

TTC v. Toronto (1990), 42 O.A.C. 20 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of Section 34 of the Planning Act, 1983;

And In The Matter Of appeals by the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, Yonge Crescent Property Development Ltd. and the Toronto Transit Commission against Zoning By-law 223-89 of the Corporation of the City of Toronto

The Toronto Transit Commission, Yonge Crescent Property Development Ltd. and the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto (applicants) v. The Corporation of the City of Toronto and the South Rosedale Ratepayers Association (respondents)

(356, 364/90)

Indexed As: Toronto Transit Commission et al. v. Toronto (City) et al.

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Divisional Court

O'Brien, J.

October 30, 1990.

Summary:

The applicants applied under s. 95 of the Ontario Municipal Act for leave to appeal a decision of the Ontario Municipal Board which upheld the validity of the zoning bylaw.

A judge of the Ontario Court of Justice, General Division (Divisional Court), dismissed the application for leave.

Land Regulation - Topic 4145

Land use control - Appeals to the courts - Leave to appeal on question of law - A judge of the Ontario Divisional Court referred to the test to be applied on an application for leave to appeal a decision of the Ontario Municipal Board - The judge held that not only must there be a question of legal importance but there must be some question as to whether the Board correctly decided the legal issue before it - See paragraphs 6 to 13.

Cases Noticed:

Gilbert et al. v. Toronto Metro (1985), 10 O.A.C. 351; 50 O.R.(2d) 654, refd to. [para. 9].

Brennan v. Ontario (Minister of Municipal Affairs) (1987), 27 O.A.C. 223; 59 O.R.(2d) 526, refd to. [para. 10].

Toronto (City) v. Torgan Developments et al. (1990), 36 O.A.C. 318; 47 M.P.L.R. 7, refd to. [para. 11].

Mod-Aire Homes Limited and Town of Bradford, Re (1990), 72 O.R.(2d) 683, refd to. [para. 12].

Campeau Corporation v. Council of City of Calgary (1978), 12 A.R. 31; 8 M.P.L.R. 88 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Cadillac-Fairview Corporation Ltd. v. City of Toronto (1980), 11 O.M.B.R. 97, refd to. [para. 20].

Township of North York, Restricted Area Bylaw 14,067 (1960), 24 D.L.R.(2d) 12 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

Salvation Army, Canada East v. Ontario (1985), 7 O.A.C. 81; 53 O.R.(2d) 704 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Statutes Noticed:

Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 347, sect. 95(1) [paras. 1, 6].

Planning Act, S.O. 1983, c. 1, sect. 34(1) [paras. 14, 18]; sect. 37 [paras. 14, 18].

Counsel:

D.E. Wires and C.M. Budweth, for the Toronto Transit Commission;

H. Lorne Morphy, for Yonge Crescent Property Development Ltd.;

Patricia H. Simpson, for the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto;

Richard E. Shibley, Q.C., and Philip P. Healy, for the Corporation of the City of Toronto;

John I. Laskin and Edward M. Morgan, for the South Rosedale Ratepayers Association.

This application was heard before O'Brien, J., of the Ontario Court of Justice, General Division (Divisional Court), on October 16, 1990, whose decision was released on October 30, 1990.