United Taxi Drivers' Fellowship of Southern Alberta et al. v. Calgary (City), 2002 ABCA 131

• Judge: O'Leary, Picard and Wittmann, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: May 29, 2002
• Citations: 2002 ABCA 131;(2002), 303 A.R. 249 (CA)

United Taxi Drivers' v. Calgary (2002), 303 A.R. 249 (CA);

    273 W.A.C. 249

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] A.R. TBEd. JN.056

The United Taxi Drivers' Fellowship of Southern Alberta, Rashpal Singh Gosal, Haringer Singh Dhesi, Charan Kamal Singh Gill, Aero Cab Ltd., Golden Cabs Inc., Superior Cabs Ltd., Supreme Cabs Ltd. and Air Linker Cab Ltd. (appellants) v. The City of Calgary (respondent) and Checker Cabs Ltd., Yellow Cab Limited, Mayfair Taxi Ltd., Alberta South Co-op Taxi Line Ltd. and Calgary Taxi Drivers Association (interveners)

(17693; 2002 ABCA 131)

Indexed As: United Taxi Drivers' Fellowship of Southern Alberta et al. v. Calgary (City)

Alberta Court of Appeal

O'Leary, Picard and Wittmann, JJ.A.

May 29, 2002.

Summary:

The Calgary Taxi Business Bylaw allowed for a freeze on the number of taxi plate licences issued by the City's Taxi Commission and provided for a periodic redistribution of taxi plate licences through a lottery system. A number of taxi companies applied for a declaration that certain provisions of the Bylaw (i.e., ss. 7(1), 9(28)(b) and 9.1) were ultra vires the Municipal Government Act and contrary to the Charter, ss. 6, 7 and 15.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported 217 A.R. 1, held that except for the administrative practice in the operation of the lottery scheme, the Bylaw was intra vires the City under the Municipal Government Act. Further the Bylaw did not breach ss. 6, 7 or 15 of the Charter. However, the administrative practice in the operation of the lottery scheme was in violation of the principles of impermissible municipal discrimination and was discrimination based on age contrary to s. 15 of the Charter. As a remedy the court ordered that the Taxi Commission must hold all future lotteries consistent with the court's reasons for judgment. The rights of existing licence holders under past lotteries should not be lost, rather the Commission should consider holding a new lottery for new licences equal in number to those issued under the discriminatory provisions. The taxi companies appealed, seeking to set aside the judgment below and to have sections of the Bylaw declared illegal. The City sought to have the appeal dismissed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal, O'Leary, J., dissenting, allowed the appeal and declared that certain parts of the bylaw exceeded the powers of the City as authorized under the Municipal Government Act. As a result, s. 7(1), portions of s. 9.1 and all of s. 9.2 of the Bylaw, which provided for freezing and limiting the number of taxi plate licences and for transfers from estates, were declared ultra vires. The court affirmed that the bylaw did not violate either ss. 7 or 15 of the Charter.

Administrative Law - Topic 4563

Judicial review - Declaratory action - Delay - [See fourth Municipal Law - Topic 1497 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 783

Liberty - Particular rights - Economic rights - [See third Municipal Law - Topic 1497 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 5656

Equality and protection of the law - Licensing - Taxis - [See second Municipal Law - Topic 1497 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8672

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Equality rights (s. 15) - Analogous categories - [See second Municipal Law - Topic 1497 ].

Municipal Law - Topic 1497

Powers of municipalities - Licensing and regulating taxis - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that those portions of the City of Calgary Taxi Business Bylaw enacted to regulate the taxi industry by freezing and limiting the number of taxi plate licences (TPLs) created a scheme that was not within the city's jurisdiction as authorized by the Municipal Government Act and the provisions were therefore ultra vires and invalid - As a result, s. 7(1), portions of s. 9.1 and all of s. 9.2 of the Bylaw, which provided for freezing and limiting the number of TPLs and for transfers from estates, were declared ultra vires - See paragraphs 52 to 91.

Municipal Law - Topic 1497

Powers of municipalities - Licensing and regulating taxis - The Calgary Taxi Business Bylaw allowed for a freeze on the number of taxi plate licences issued by the City's Taxi Commission and provided for a periodic redistribution of taxi plate licences through a lottery system - In order to participate in the lottery one had to have been eligible to obtain a taxi driver's licence on February 6, 1986 - A number of taxi drivers alleged that those who did not hold a licence on February 6, 1986, were discriminated against on the analogous ground of being an "outsider" because they could not participate in the lottery contrary to s. 15 of the Charter - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that s. 15 was not violated where it was not established that the category of "outsider" constituted an analogous ground - See paragraphs 92 to 126.

Municipal Law - Topic 1497

Powers of municipalities - Licensing and regulating taxis - The Calgary Taxi Business Bylaw allowed for a freeze on the number of taxi plate licences issued by the City's Taxi Commission and provided for a periodic redistribution of taxi plate licences through a lottery system - A number of taxi drivers applied for a declaration that certain provisions of the Bylaw were contrary to s. 7 of the Charter (i.e., liberty to pursue a livelihood) - A chambers judge rejected this argument, holding that s. 7 does not, through "liberty" protect the purely economic interest arguments presented by the taxi drivers - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that the judge did not err in finding that s. 7 was not violated - See paragraphs 127 to 157.

Municipal Law - Topic 1497

Powers of municipalities - Licensing and regulating taxis - The Calgary Taxi Business Bylaw allowed for a freeze on the number of taxi plate licences issued by the City's Taxi Commission and provided for a periodic redistribution of taxi plate licences through a lottery system - Several taxi companies sought declaratory relief respecting the validity of the bylaw - The City alleged delay - The action was commenced over 11 years since the instigation of the freeze by the Taxi Commission and 4 years after the freeze was established by bylaw - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that certain provisions of the bylaw in question were void; therefore, declaratory relief need not be denied because of delay - Here the court granted the relief sought despite the delay - Delay in hearing the matter did not confer validity on the impugned provisions - See paragraphs 158 to 169.

Municipal Law - Topic 1682

Powers of municipalities - Judicial review of exercise of powers - Scope of powers of judicial review - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that a decision of a municipal body could be reviewed for jurisdictional error on a standard of correctness and an intra vires decision on a standard of patent unreasonableness - See paragraphs 44 to 48.

Municipal Law - Topic 3884

Bylaws - Quashing bylaws - Judicial review - Practice - Standard of review - [See Municipal Law - Topic 1682 ].

Cases Noticed:

Corbiere et al. v. Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs) et al., [1999] 2 S.C.R. 203; 239 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 35].

Shell Canada Products Ltd. v. Vancouver (City), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 231; 163 N.R. 81; 41 B.C.A.C. 81; 66 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [paras. 45, 189].

Nanaimo (City) v. Rascal Trucking Ltd. et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 342; 251 N.R. 42; 132 B.C.A.C. 298; 215 W.A.C. 298, refd to. [paras. 46, 187].

Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 982, addendum [1998] 1 S.C.R. 1222; 226 N.R. 201, refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. Greenbaum (M.), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 674; 149 N.R. 114; 61 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [paras. 47, 186].

R. v. Brown (A.R.R.) (1992), 127 A.R. 89; 20 W.A.C. 89; 73 C.C.C.(3d) 481 (C.A.), revd. [1993] 2 S.C.R. 918; 155 N.R. 225; 141 A.R. 163; 46 W.A.C. 163; 83 C.C.C.(3d) 129, refd to. [para. 49].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335, refd to. [para. 50].

Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Dagenais et al., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 835; 175 N.R. 1; 76 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 50].

Thomson Newspapers Co. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 877; 226 N.R. 1; 109 O.A.C. 201, refd to. [para. 50].

R. v. Chung, [1929] 1 W.W.R. 394 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 53].

R. v. Barlow, [1922] 3 W.W.R. 1195 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 53].

R. (ex rel. Nalder) v. Barlow - see R. v. Barlow.

Merritt v. Toronto (City) (1895), 22 O.A.R. 205 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 54].

R. v. Sharma (D.), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 650; 149 N.R. 161; 61 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [paras. 57, 180].

114957 Canada Ltée (Spraytech, Société d'arrosage) et al. v. Hudson (Town) (2001), 271 N.R. 201 (S.C.C.), refd to. [paras. 57, 180].

Hamilton Powder Co. v. Gloucester (Township) (1909), 13 O.W.R. 661 (Dist. Ct.), refd to. [para. 58].

Clay v. Victoria (City) (1886), 1 B.C.R. (Pt. 2) 300 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 58].

Winnipeg Beach (Town) By-law No. 92, Re, [1919] 3 W.W.R. 696 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 58].

Bannan v. Toronto (City) (1892), 22 O.R. 274 (Ch. Div.), refd to. [para. 58].

Ford v. McArthur, [1876] 39 Vic. 542 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 59].

Segal v. Montreal (City), [1931] 4 D.L.R. 603 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. (ex rel. Kane) v. Haworth, [1920] 2 W.W.R. 1043 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. (ex rel. Best) v. Veniot (1939), 71 C.C.C. 332 (N.S.C.A.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. Veinot - see R. (ex rel. Best) v. Veniot.

Cities Service Oil Co. v. Kingston (City) (1956), 5 D.L.R.(2d) 126 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 63].

Texaco Canada Ltd. v. Vanier (City) (1981), 36 N.R. 164; 120 D.L.R.(3d) 193 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 63].

Citipark Inc. et al. v. Hamilton (City), [2000] O.T.C. 895; 20 M.P.L.R.(3d) 23 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 63].

Robinson v. Board of Commissioners of Police of Kingston (City) (1980), 29 O.R.(2d) 326 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 63].

Christie Taxi Ltd. v. Doran (1975), 10 O.R.(2d) 313 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 64].

Canadian Freightways Ltd. v. Calgary (City) (1967), 61 D.L.R.(2d) 253 (Alta. T.D.), refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. McNeil, [1925] 1 D.L.R. 227 (Alta. T.D.), refd to. [para. 67].

Payne v. Prince George (City), [1978] 1 S.C.R. 458; 15 N.R. 386; 75 D.L.R.(3d) 1, refd to. [paras. 72, 201].

Gulf Canada Ltd. v. Vancouver (City) (1981), 130 D.L.R.(3d) 146 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 73].

Trymar Corp. v. Kitchener (City) (1988), 31 O.A.C. 72 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 74].

Zivkovic v. Kitchener (City) (1999), 92 O.T.C. 321; 1 M.P.L.R.(3d) 11 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 74].

London Banqueter Inc. v. London (City) (1994), 69 O.A.C. 383 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 74].

White Hatter Limousine Service Ltd. v. Calgary (City) (1993), 144 A.R. 379 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 74, 199].

Toronto (City) v. Mandelbaum, [1932] 3 D.L.R. 604 (Ont. S.C.), refd to. [para. 75].

Minnedosa (Town) By-law No. 304, Re; Sing v. Minnedosa (Town), [1918] 3 W.W.R. 181 (Man. K.B.), refd to. [para. 75].

R. v. Nault (1983), 30 Sask.R. 35 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 75].

Kovinic v. Niagara Falls (City), [1999] O.T.C. 251; 3 M.P.L.R.(3d) 285 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 76].

Toronto (City) v. Elias Rogers Co. (1914), 19 D.L.R. 75 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 80].

Virgo v. Toronto (City), [1896] A.C. 88 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 83].

R. v. McLean (1988), 94 A.R. 3 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 83].

Hall v. Moose Jaw (City) (1910), 3 Sask. L.R. 22; 12 W.L.R. 693 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 83].

Cannon Contracting Ltd. v. Mission (District) (1992), 9 M.P.L.R.(2d) 109 (B.C.S.C.), affd. (1994), 53 B.C.A.C. 293; 87 W.A.C. 293 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 84].

Malette v. Eldon (Township) et al. (1977), 17 O.R.(2d) 576 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 84].

Vriend et al. v. Alberta, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 493; 224 N.R. 1; 212 A.R. 237; 168 W.A.C. 237, refd to. [para. 95].

Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143; 91 N.R. 255, refd to. [para. 96].

Reference Re Sections 32 and 34 of the Worker's Compensation Act (Nfld.), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 922; 96 N.R. 227; 76 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 181; 235 A.P.R. 181, refd to. [para. 97].

Wolff (Rudolph) & Co. and Noranda Inc. v. Canada, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 695; 106 N.R. 1; 39 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 97].

R. v. Turpin, Siddiqui and Clauzel, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1296; 96 N.R. 115; 34 O.A.C. 115, refd to. [para. 97].

Miron and Valliere v. Trudel et al., [1995] 2 S.C.R. 418; 181 N.R. 253; 81 O.A.C. 253, refd to. [para. 98].

Egan and Nesbit v. Canada, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 513; 182 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 99].

Law v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 497; 236 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 102].

Ardoch Algonquin First Nation and Allies et al. v. Ontario et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 950; 255 N.R. 1; 134 O.A.C. 201, refd to. [para. 106].

Lovelace v. Ontario - see Ardoch Algonquin First Nation and Allies et al. v. Ontario et al.

McKinley v. BC Tel et al., [2001] 2 S.C.R. 161; 271 N.R. 16; 153 B.C.A.C. 161; 251 W.A.C. 161; 200 D.L.R.(4th) 385, refd to. [para. 117].

Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 313; 74 N.R. 99; 78 A.R. 1, refd to. [para. 129].

Reference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta.) - see Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration.

Lefebvre v. HOJ Industries Ltd.; Machtinger v. HOJ Industries Ltd., [1992] 1 S.C.R. 986; 136 N.R. 40; 53 O.A.C. 200, refd to. [para. 129].

Machtinger v. HOJ Industries Ltd. - see Lefebvre v. HOJ Industries Ltd.; Machtinger v. HOJ Industries Ltd.

Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 701; 219 N.R. 161; 123 Man.R.(2d) 1; 159 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 129].

Delisle v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [1999] 2 S.C.R. 989; 244 N.R. 33, refd to. [para. 129].

Dunmore et al. v. Ontario (Attorney General) et al. (2001), 279 N.R. 201; 154 O.A.C. 201 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 129].

Reference Re Sections 193 and 195.1(1)(c) of the Criminal Code, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1123; 109 N.R. 81; 68 Man.R.(2d) 1; [1990] 4 W.W.R. 481, refd to. [para. 131].

Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 177; 58 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 132].

R. v. Jones, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 284; 69 N.R. 241; 73 A.R. 133, refd to. [para. 133].

R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 30; 82 N.R. 1; 26 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 133].

R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 713; 71 N.R. 161; 19 O.A.C. 239, refd to. [para. 134].

R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd. - see R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al.

Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General) et al., [1993] 3 S.C.R. 519; 158 N.R. 1; 34 B.C.A.C. 1; 56 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 136].

Blencoe v. Human Rights Commission (B.C.) et al., [2000] 2 S.C.R. 307; 260 N.R. 1; 141 B.C.A.C. 161; 231 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 138].

New Brunswick (Minister of Health and Community Services) v. J.G. and D.V., [1999] 3 S.C.R. 46; 244 N.R. 276; 216 N.B.R.(2d) 25; 552 A.P.R. 25, refd to. [para. 140].

R.V.P. Enterprises Ltd. v. British Columbia (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs), [1988] 4 W.W.R. 726 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 145].

Whitbread v. Walley (1988), 26 B.C.L.R.(2d) 203 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 145].

R. v. Quesnel (1985), 12 O.A.C. 165; 53 O.R.(2d) 338 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 146].

Bassett v. Canada et al. (1987), 53 Sask.R. 81; 35 D.L.R.(4th) 537 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 147].

Wilson v. Medical Services Commission (B.C.) (1988), 30 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 148].

Milk Board (B.C.) v. Clearview Dairy Farm Inc. (1986), 69 B.C.L.R. 220 (S.C.), affd. (1987), 12 B.C.L.R.(2d) 116 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 150].

R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al. (1984), 5 O.A.C. 1; 14 D.L.R.(4th) 10 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 150].

Black & Co. v. Law Society of Alberta (1986), 68 A.R. 259; 27 D.L.R.(4th) 527 (C.A.), affd. [1989] 1 S.C.R. 591; 93 N.R. 266; 96 A.R. 352; 58 D.L.R.(4th) 317, refd to. [paras. 152, 153].

Canada (Attorney General) v. P.P.G. Industries Canada Ltd. and Pilkington Brothers (Canada) Ltd., [1976] 2 S.C.R. 739; 7 N.R. 209, refd to. [para. 163].

Tonks v. Reid, [1967] S.C.R. 81, refd to. [para. 163].

Kuchma v. Tache (Rural Municipality), [1945] S.C.R. 234, refd to. [para. 163].

Wiswell v. Winnipeg (City), [1965] S.C.R. 512, refd to. [para. 164].

Howard v. Toronto (City), [1928] 1 D.L.R. 952 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 164].

Friends of the Oldman River Society v. Canada (Minister of Transport and Minister of Fisheries and Oceans), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 3; 132 N.R. 321, refd to. [para. 166].

R. v. Debaji Foods Ltd. (1981), 30 A.R. 143; 124 D.L.R.(3d) 254 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 172].

Kruse v. Johnson, [1898] 2 Q.B. 91 (D.C.), refd to. [para. 182].

R. v. Guignard (R.) (2002), 282 N.R. 365 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 184].

Hamilton (City) v. Hamilton Distillery Co. (1907), 38 S.C.R. 239, refd to. [para. 185].

McKay v. R., [1965] S.C.R. 798, refd to. [para. 186].

Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27; 221 N.R. 241; 106 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 188].

M & D Farm Ltd. et al. v. Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corp., [1999] 2 S.C.R. 961; 245 N.R. 165; 138 Man.R.(2d) 161; 202 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 188].

Gray, Re (1918), 42 D.L.R. 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 195].

Richard v. Red Deer (City) (1993), 138 A.R. 131; 8 Alta. L.R.(3d) 345 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 196].

All-Canadian Push Cart Co. and Rooke v. Calgary (City) (1992), 134 A.R. 31; 6 Alta. L.R.(3d) 25 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 201].

Skyline Cabs (1982) Ltd. v. Edmonton (City) (1996), 192 A.R. 108 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 206].

Sharlmark Hotels Ltd. v. Metropolitan Toronto (Municipality) (1981), 32 O.R.(2d) 129 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 207].

Arcade Amusements Inc. v. Montreal (City), [1985] 1 S.C.R. 368; 58 N.R. 339, refd to. [para. 209].

698114 Alberta Ltd. v. Banff (Town) et al. (2000), 266 A.R. 70; 228 W.A.C. 70 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 215].

Statutes Noticed:

Calgary (City) Bylaws, Taxi Business Bylaw 91/77, generally [para. 2]; sect. 7, sect. 9 [para. 19].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 2(d) [para. 23]; sect. 6(2) [para. 24]; sect. 7 [para. 25]; sect. 15 [para. 26].

Municipal Government Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. M-26, sect. 234 [para. 20]; sect. 536, sect. 537, sect. 538 [para. 161].

Municipal Government Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. M-26, sect. 3, sect. 7, sect. 8, sect. 9, sect. 13, sect. 715 [para. 21].

Rules of Court (Alta.), rule 753.11 [para. 160].

Taxi Business Bylaw 91/77 - see Calgary (City) Bylaws.

Authors and Works Noticed:

Canadian Encyclopedic Digest, vol. 5, Title 23, s. 64 [para. 59].

Colvin, Eric, Section Seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1989), 68 Can. Bar Rev. 560, p. 574 [para. 142].

Driedger, Elmer A., Construction of Statutes (3rd Ed. 1994), p. 35 [para. 189].

Holland, Denys C., and McGowan, John P., Delegated Legislation in Canada (1989), pp. 203, 204 [para. 197].

Jones, David P., and de Villars, Anne S., Principles of Administrative Law (3rd Ed. 1999), pp. 582, 583, 584 [para. 163].

Rogers, Ian MacFee, The Law of Canadian Municipal Corporations (2nd Ed. 1971) (Looseleaf), paras. 64.1 [para. 190]; 79.3 [para. 192]; 195.7 [para. 175]; pp. 324, 325 [para. 52]; 406.3-406.4 [para. 209]; 712 [para. 83].

Saville, Francis M., and Cotton, Barbara, An overview of the Proposals for a New Municipal Government Act for Alberta (Oct. 1991), 5 C.J.A.L.P., pp. 93-104 [para. 200, footnote 1].

Singleton, Robyn, Municipal Governance in Alberta and Manitoba: new tools and flexibility? (Sept. 1996), 3 Digest M. & P.L., p. 333(4) [para. 200, footnote 2].

Smither, Michael J., Ontario: proposals for a new Municipal Act (Apr. 1997), 107 Mun. World No. 4, p. 14(3) [para. 200, footnote 2].

Wade, William, and Forsyth, Christopher, Administrative Law (7th Ed. 1994), c. 10, generally [para. 163].

Counsel:

R.C. Steele, for the appellant, United Taxi Fellowship;

G.I. Zinner, for the appellants, Gosal, Dhesi & Golden, Superior & Supreme Cabs;

R.D. Gibson, for the appellants, Aero & Air Linker Cabs;

P.L. Tolley and L.G. Gosselin, for the respondent, City of Calgary;

R.J. Wilkins, Q.C., for the interveners, Checker Cabs et al.

This appeal was heard on June 11, 2001, before O'Leary, Picard and Wittmann, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal.

The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered on May 29, 2002, when the following opinions were filed:

Wittmann, J.A. (Picard, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 173;

O'Leary, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 174 to 219.