We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
Constitutional Law – Division of Powers –
Aerodrome
This is the first of two decisions released concurrently by the
Supreme Court of Canada assessing the constitutional authority of
provincial regulation (and municipal land-use by-laws) impacting
the field of aeronautics through the division of powers
analysis.
In 1995, the municipality amended its zoning by-law to address
aviation activity. The pre-amble of this amending by-law stated
that it was passed to balance serenity for vacationers with
commercial interests. The amendment divided Gobeil Lake's
existing planning zone into two regions. A newly-created region,
which did not include Gobeil Lake, was provided with the explicit
authorization to have structures related to float planes. By
contrast, the remaining zone, which contained Gobeil Lake,
implicitly prohibited aerodrome activity. This implicit prohibition
applied to most of the municipality through the by-law
amendment.
In 2005, a properly-licensed numbered company started operating
flight excursions from Gobeil Lake. In 2006, the municipality
obtained an injunction based on the 1995 amending by-law ordering
the numbered company to cease its activity on Gobeil Lake. The
Quebec Court of Appeal overturned the lower court on division of
powers grounds.
A 7-2 majority of the Supreme Court dismissed this further
appeal. McLachlin C.J.C., writing for the majority, held that the
municipal by-law was, in pith and substance, related to aerodromes,
a matter exclusively within Parliament's power to legislate for
"peace, order and good government". The by-law was
invalid as ultra vires provincial jurisdiction and should
be read down so as to not effect aerodromes.
The Court went on to consider the application of the ancillary
powers doctrine. This doctrine is applicable where a law is, in
pith and substance, outside the jurisdiction of the enacting
legislature but, by virtue of the rational functional connection
test, a jurisdictional overhang of an impugned, invalid law may be
saved because the impugned law's operation is
"necessary" or "functional" to the overarching
purpose of an otherwise intra vires legislative scheme.
The degree of connection required to save a jurisdictional breach
is determined relative to the degree of jurisdictional
overhang.
This analysis is to begin by determining the purpose of the
legislative scheme that the impugned law is said to further. In
this case, the legislative scheme was land-use planning. The
purpose and effect of the amendment by-law did not follow the
general principles of land-use planning or further the zoning
by-law for the municipality specifically. The amendment blatantly
acted as a prohibition on aviation in the region. As a result,
there was no redeeming connection that could be found to
resuscitate the by-law through the ancillary powers doctrine.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
SIGNIFICANCE OF DECISION
This is the first appellate decision to interpret subsection 43(2) of Canada’s Marine Liability Act, which makes the Hague-Visby Rules apply compulsorily to certain contracts of carriage by water between places in Canada.
The Supreme Court of Canada announced today that it will hear an appeal of a case which considered the interaction and potential conflict between the Montreal Convention (a treaty governing international air travel) and Canadian language law rights.
Canada’s Minister of State has recently announced that new software will be deployed on Canada’s full-body scanners that will enhance passenger privacy at airports.
Most business lawyers would be familiar with the standard types of legal due diligence carried out in the usual commercial purchase and sale or financing transaction.
Bill C-11, now proclaimed into law, has significantly changed the operation of the Canada Transportation Act (the "CTA"), including changes to the process of notification and review of mergers involving transportation undertakings
The Canadian government has tabled draft amendments to the Canada Transportation Act that would introduce a new "public interest review process" for mergers and acquisitions involving federally regulated "transportation undertakings."
On January 25, 2013, the Minister of Transportation signed a regulation amending the Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways, O. Reg. 239/02 ("MMS"), under the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 ("Municipal Act").
