United Taxi Drivers' Fellowship of Southern Alberta et al. v. Calgary (City), (1998) 217 A.R. 1 (QB)

• Judge: Rooke, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: March 05, 1998
• Citations: (1998), 217 A.R. 1 (QB)

United Taxi Drivers' v. Calgary (1998), 217 A.R. 1 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] A.R. TBEd. MR.062

The United Taxi Drivers' Fellowship of Southern Alberta, Rashpal Singh Gosal, Harinder Singh Dhesi, Charan Kamal, Singh Gill, Aero Cab Ltd., Golden Cabs Inc., Advance Cab Co. Ltd. 1 , Calgary Cab Co. Ltd. and Air Linker Cab Ltd. (applicants) 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 (intervenors)

(Action No. 9201-14639)

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

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Calgary

Rooke, J.

March 5, 1998.

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 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.

Civil Rights - Topic 588

Mobility rights - Violation - What consti­tutes - Regulation of taxi businesses - [See first Municipal Law - Topic 1497 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 783

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

Civil Rights - Topic 994

Discrimination - Employment - Age - General - [See second Municipal Law - Topic 1497 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 3193

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Administrative and noncriminal proceedings - Procedure not contrary to fundamental justice - [See fourth 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 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 were contrary to s. 6 of the Charter (i.e., mobility rights) - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected this argument - See paragraphs 62 to 69.

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 (TPL) 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 discriminatory and contrary to s. 15 of the Charter - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected this argument holding that neither being a taxi driver, or having or not having a TPL, were "per­sonal charac­teristics" nor were they anal­ogous to any grounds enumerated in s. 15 -The court did note that one aspect of the lottery scheme would constitute age dis­crimination should it continue - See para­graphs 70 to 101.

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) - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected this argu­ment, holding that s. 7 does not, through "lib­erty" protect the purely economic interest arguments presented by the taxi drivers - See paragraphs 102 to 119.

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 (contrary to the principles of fundamental justice) - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that none of the impugned provisions of the Bylaw were so manifestly unfair, hav­ing regard to the effect of them upon the taxi drivers, as to violate the principles of fundamental justice - See paragraphs 120 to 123.

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 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 because the provisions were discrimi­natory and unsupported by appropriate enabling legislation - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the impugned provisions were authorized by the Act and were not ultra vires - However, the court cautioned that the Commission could not carry out unlawful discriminatory practices under a lawful lottery scheme - See para­graphs 10 to 61.

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 - The Bylaw was passed under the authority of s. 234 of the Municipal Government Act (1980), now repealed, and continued under the authority of the Municipal Government Act (1994) - Several taxi companies alleged that the 1994 Act no longer con­tained specific provisions allowing dis­crimination and therefore the Bylaw, as continued under the 1994 Act was ultra vires - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the 1994 Act was specific enough to give the City the right to limit the issuance of licences - See paragraphs 22, 23, 39 to 53.

Municipal Law - Topic 1497

Powers of municipalities - Licensing and regulating taxis - The Calgary Taxi Busi­ness Bylaw, passed under the Municipal Government Act, froze the number of taxi plate licences issued and provided for a periodic redistribution of taxi plate licences (TPLs) through a lottery system - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that s. 8(b) of the Municipal Government Act allowed for the establishment of classes and for dealing with each class differently - Accordingly, inter-class dis­crimination was specifically authorized but discrimina­tion within (or intra) class was not - There­fore it was permissible under s. 8(b) to make distinctions between drivers and owners, but not permissible to dis­criminate between some drivers and other drivers, or some owners and other owners - The court held that there was no intra-class discrimi­nation in the issuance of new TPLs (i.e., everyone was treated the same - none were issued) - See para­graph 54.

Municipal Law - Topic 1497

Powers of municipalities - Licensing and regulating taxis - The Calgary Taxi Busi­ness Bylaw, passed under the Municipal Government Act, froze the number of taxi plate licences issued and provided for a periodic redistribution of taxi plate licences (TPLs) through a lottery system - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that s. 8(b) of the Municipal Government Act allowed for the establishment of classes and for dealing with each class differently - Accordingly, inter-class dis­crimination was specifically authorized but discrimina­tion within (or intra) class was not - The court held that s. 9(28)(b) of the Bylaw which established the lottery scheme for redistribution of TPLs was not discrimina­tory, however, the practice and administra­tion of the lottery system by the Calgary Taxi Commission was illegally discrimina­tory - The court noted that its ruling on this was prospective only and did not affect current TPL holders - See para­graphs 57 to 61.

Municipal Law - Topic 3846

Bylaws - Quashing bylaws - Grounds for judicial interference - Discrimination - [See fifth, sixth and seventh and eighth Munici­pal Law - Topic 1497 ].

Cases Noticed:

Beck and Gerry's Taxi & Limousine Ltd. v. Edmonton (City) (1993), 143 A.R. 74; 12 Alta. L.R.(3d) 273 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8, footnote 3].

Arcade Amusements Inc. v. Montreal (City), [1985] 1 S.C.R. 368; 58 N.R. 339; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 161, refd to. [para. 20].

Richard v. Red Deer (City) (1993), 138 A.R. 131; 8 Alta. L.R.(3d) 345 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 21].

White Hatter Limousine Service Ltd. v. Calgary (City) (1993), 144 A.R. 379 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 21].

Skyline Cabs (1982) Ltd. v. Edmonton (City) (1996), 192 A.R. 108; 46 Alta. L.R.(3d) 338; 37 M.P.L.R.(2d) 16 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Northern Electric Co. et al., [1955] O.R. 431 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 21, foot­note 5].

Holmes v. Jarrett, [1993] O.J. No. 679 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 21, footnote 5].

Hansard Spruce Mills Ltd., Re (1954), 13 W.W.R.(N.S.) 285 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 21, footnote 5].

Bluebell Taxi (1977) Ltd. and Bob's Taxi v. Dartmouth (City) (1982), 54 N.S.R.(2d) 434; 112 A.P.R. 434; 19 M.P.L.R. 262 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 27].

Montreal (City) v. Morgan, [1920] 3 W.W.R. 36 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 30].

Shilleto Drug Co. v. Hanna (Town), [1931] 3 D.L.R. 567 (Alta. S.C.), refd to. [para. 31].

Cameron v. Victoria (City) (1905), 2 W.L.R. 387 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

Kruse v. Johnson, [1898] 2 Q.B. 91, refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. Greenbaum (M.) (1993), 149 N.R. 114; 61 O.A.C. 241; 100 D.L.R.(4th) 183 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 34].

Babiuk v. Calgary (City) (1992), 133 A.R. 21; 4 Alta. L.R.(3d) 390 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 36].

R. v. Sharma (D.) (1993), 149 N.R. 161; 61 O.A.C. 161; 100 D.L.R.(4th) 167 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 46].

Barrel Taxi Ltd. v. Edmonton (City) et al. (1996), 182 A.R. 351 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 46].

Cunningham v. Regina (City) (1994), 120 Sask.R. 117; 68 W.A.C. 117; 19 M.P.L.R.(2d) 14 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 47].

Payne v. Prince George (City) (1977), 15 N.R. 386; 75 D.L.R.(3d) 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 47].

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. 48].

Barclay v. Darlington (Township) (1854), 12 U.C.Q.B. 86, refd to. [para. 50].

Hamilton Independent Variety & Confec­tionery Stores Inc. v. Hamilton (City) (1983), 143 D.L.R.(3d) 498 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 51].

Ontario Adult Entertainment Bar Associ­ation v. Metropolitan Toronto (Munici­pality) (1995), 86 O.A.C. 161; 29 M.P.L.R.(2d) 141 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 52].

Mia v. Medical Services Commission (B.C.) (1985), 61 B.C.L.R. 273; 17 D.L.R.(4th) 385 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 53].

Leavey et al. v. London (City) (1979), 107 D.L.R.(3d) 411 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 54].

Kresge (S.S.) Co. v. Windsor (City) et al., [1957] O.W.N. 154; 7 D.L.R.(2d) 708 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 54].

Notte v. Dryden (Town) (1973), 1 O.R.(2d) 496 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 54].

Bunce v. Cobourg (Town), [1963] 2 O.R. 343; 39 D.L.R.(2d) 513 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 59].

Wilson v. Medical Services Commission (B.C.) (1988), 30 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 64, footnote 6].

Skapinker v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 357; 53 N.R. 169; 3 O.A.C. 321; 9 D.L.R.(4th) 161; 11 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 68].

Prince Edward Island v. Island Equine Clinic Ltd. and Moore (1991), 96 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 276; 305 A.P.R. 276; 81 D.L.R.(4th) 350 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 69].

Central Amusement (N.B.) Ltd. v. Atlantic Lottery Corp. et al. (1991), 115 N.B.R.(2d) 429; 291 A.P.R. 429 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 69].

Andrews v. Law Society of British Colum­bia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143; 91 N.R. 255; [1989] 2 W.W.R. 289; 56 D.L.R.(4th) 1; 34 B.C.L.R.(2d) 273; 36 C.R.R. 193; 25 C.C.E.L. 255, refd to. [para. 73].

R. v. Turpin, Siddiqui and Clauzel, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1296; 96 N.R. 115; 34 O.A.C. 115; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 8; 69 C.R.(3d) 97; 39 C.R.R. 306, refd to. [para. 73].

R. v. Westfair Foods Ltd. and Canada Safeway Ltd. (1989), 80 Sask.R. 33; 65 D.L.R.(4th) 56 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 73].

Benner v. Canada (Secretary of State), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 358; 208 N.R. 81, refd to. [para. 75].

Eaton v. Board of Education of Brant County, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 241; 207 N.R. 171; 97 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 75].

Adler et al. v. Ontario et al., [1996] 3 S.C.R. 609; 204 N.R. 81; 95 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 76].

Eldridge et al. v. British Columbia (Attor­ney General) et al. (1997), 218 N.R. 161; 96 B.C.A.C. 81; 155 W.A.C. 81; 151 D.L.R.(4th) 577 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 76].

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. 76].

Egan and Nesbit v. Canada, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 513; 182 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 76].

Thibaudeau v. Minister of National Revenue, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 627; 182 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 76].

R. v. Magder (Paul) Furs Ltd. et al. (1989), 33 O.A.C. 81; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 267 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1990), 105 N.R. 153; 37 O.A.C. 159; 51 C.C.C.(3d) vii (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 79].

Canadian Egg Marketing Agency v. Richardson (1996), 38 Admin. L.R.(2d) 49 (N.W.T.C.A.), refd to. [para. 81].

Haig and Birch v. Canada et al. (1992), 57 O.A.C. 272; 9 O.R.(3d) 495 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

Dartmouth/Halifax County Regional Hous­ing Authority v. Sparks (1993), 119 N.S.R.(2d) 91; 330 A.P.R. 91; 101 D.L.R.(4th) 224 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

Schachter v. Canada et al., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 679; 139 N.R. 1; 93 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 90].

Massingham-Pearce v. Konkolus (1995), 170 A.R. 10 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 90].

Schafer et al. v. Canada (Attorney Gen­eral) et al. (1997), 102 O.A.C. 321; 35 O.R.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

Reform Party of Canada et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) (1995), 174 A.R. 169; 102 W.A.C. 169 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

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. 90].

Reference Re Workers' Compensation Act, 1983 (Nfld.) - see Reference Re Sections 32 and 34 of the Workers' Compensation Act (Nfld.).

Reference Re Sections 32 and 34 of the Workers' 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; 56 D.L.R.(4th) 765; 40 C.R.R. 135, refd to. [para. 90].

Ontario Public Service Employees Union et al. v. National Citizens' Coalition Inc. et al. (1990), 38 O.A.C. 70; 74 O.R.(2d) 260 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

George v. Canada (Attorney General) (1990), 116 N.R. 185 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

Taylor v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1991), 126 N.R. 345; 81 D.L.R.(4th) 679 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

A & L Investments Ltd. et al. v. Ontario (1993), 13 O.R.(3d) 799 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 90].

Lister v. Ontario (Attorney General) (1990), 72 O.R.(2d) 354 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 90].

Carroll v. Canada (Attorney General) (1994), 164 A.R. 117 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 90].

R. v. Powless, [1996] N.W.T.J. No. 89 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 90].

Haddock v. Ontario (Attorney General) (1990), 73 O.R.(2d) 545 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 93].

R. v. Falk, [1988] 4 W.W.R. 754; 52 Man.R.(2d) 143 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 95].

Apsit v. Human Rights Commission (Man.) - see Manitoba Rice Farmers Association v. Human Rights Commis­sion (Man.).

Manitoba Rice Farmers Association v. Human Rights Commission (Man.), [1988] 1 W.W.R. 629; 50 Man.R.(2d) 92 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 101].

Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Québec (Procureur général), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927; 94 N.R. 167; 24 Q.A.C. 2; 58 D.L.R.(4th) 577; 25 C.P.R.(3d) 417, refd to. [para. 107].

R. v. Robson (1984), 56 B.C.L.R. 194; 41 C.R.(3d) 68; 28 M.V.R. 167; 14 C.C.C.(3d) 56; 11 D.L.R.(4th) 727 (S.C.), affd. [1985] B.C.J. No. 2254; 28 B.C.L.R.(2d) 8 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 111].

Abbotsford Taxi Ltd. v. Motor Carrier Com­mission (B.C.) (1985), 23 D.L.R.(4th) 365 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 111].

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; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 65; 77 C.R.(3d) 1; [1990] 4 W.W.R. 481, refd to. [para. 113].

Budge v. Workers' Compensation Board (Alta.) (1991), 111 A.R. 228; 78 Alta.L.R.(2d) 193 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 114].

Beck v. Edmonton (City) et al. (1991), 118 A.R. 107 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 115].

Cosyns v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. (1992), 53 O.A.C. 127; 88 D.L.R.(4th) 507 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 116].

Kopyto v. Law Society of Upper Canada (1993), 67 O.A.C. 297; 107 D.L.R.(4th) 259 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 117].

Black & Co. v. Law Society of Alberta (1986), 68 A.R. 259; 44 Alta. L.R.(2d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 118].

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

Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 313; 74 N.R. 99; 78 A.R. 1; [1987] 3 W.W.R. 577, refd to. [para. 118].

Khaliq-Kareemi v. Health Services and Insurance Commission (N.S.) (1989), 89 N.S.R.(2d) 388; 227 A.P.R. 388 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 118].

Reference Re Section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (B.C.), [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486; 63 N.R. 266; 48 C.R.(3d) 289; 23 C.C.C.(3d) 289; [1986] 1 W.W.R. 481, refd to. [para. 123].

R. v. Jones, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 284; 69 N.R. 241; 73 A.R. 133; 31 D.L.R.(4th) 569, refd to. [para. 123].

R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 30; 82 N.R. 1; 26 O.A.C. 1; 44 D.L.R.(4th) 385; 31 C.R.R. 1; 37 C.C.C.(3d) 449; 62 C.R.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 123].

507089 Alberta Ltd. v. Calgary (City) (1996), 188 A.R. 384; 41 Alta. L.R.(3d) 112; 33 M.P.L.R.(2d) 247 (Q.B.), revd. (1996), 193 A.R. 169; 135 W.A.C. 169; 46 Alta. L.R.(3d) 38; 36 M.P.L.R.(2d) 154 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 125].

Claudio's Restaurant Group Inc. and Lamonaco v. Calgary (City) (1993), 147 A.R. 355; 15 Alta. L.R.(3d) 141 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 127].

Statutes Noticed:

Calgary (City) Bylaws, Taxi Business Bylaw 91/77, generally [para. 1]; sect. 7(1) [para. 1]; sect. 9.1(a) [para. 55]; sect. 9(28)(a) [para. 57].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 6(2) [para. 65]; sect. 6(3) [para. 65]; sect. 7 [para. 103]; sect. 15 [para. 72].

Municipal Government Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. M-26, sect. 234 [para. 28].

Municipal Government Act, S.A. 1994, c. 26.1, sect. 3(a), sect. 3(c), sect. 7, sect. 8, sect. 9, sect. 13, sect. 715 [para. 43].

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

Authors and Works Noticed:

Gibson, Dale, The Law of the Charter: Equality Rights (1990), generally [para. 88].

Hogg, Peter W., Constitutional Law of Canada (3rd Ed. 1997) (Looseleaf), pp. 52-26 [para. 87]; 52-56 [para. 88].

Random House College Dictionary (Rev. Ed. 1979) [para. 83].

Rogers, Ian MacFee, The Law of Canadian Municipal Corporations (2nd Ed. 1971) (Looseleaf), pp. 692, 696, 697, 982 [para. 48]; vol. 2, pp. 1034.4, para. 195.3 [para. 37]; 1034.4a - 1034.5 [para. 36].

Counsel:

G.T. Zinner, R.D. Gibson and A.P.S. Sara, for the applicants;

P.T. Tolley, for the City;

R.J. Wilkins, Q.C., for the broker intervenors;

T.W. Bardsley, for the driver intervenors.

This application was heard before Rooke, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Calgary, who delivered the following judgment on March 5, 1998.