PLAN471 Lecture Notes - Lecture 5: Shark Fin Soup, Ultra Vires, Vagueness
20 Mar 2016
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
A reasonable person should be able to understand the bylaw, must have certainty in order for people to be able to comply with it. Cambridge bingo centre v. waterloo (regional municipality), 2000. Vagueness must be determined by judges on an individual case. Must be passed through council as a by-law with recommendations from fire chief, must have elected representation and duty to consult and accountability. If municipality is authorized to regulate something, they cannot simply prohibit it instead of regulating it: v. konakov. Brantford omnibus zoning by-law, does not provide for existing use of a body rub parlour, no place where it is permitted. Konakov: authorized by planning act to regulate land uses and must provide some zoning for its placement: plaintiff must prove that the bylaw is ultra vires, burden of proof. Court disagreed, upheld the bylaw: bylaw does not prohibit, but just does not permit the establishment. Creates a situation where there is a ban without a ban.
