A citizen of the Township of Seguin, Mr. Dennis Hamer, who apparently was feeding bears by hand, unsuccessfully challenged a municipal by-law prohibiting feeding bears.
Mr. Hamer argued it was bad faith for the Township to pass it, without proof that feeding bears "causes an escalation in a threat to public health, safety and well being of the residents and visitors of the Township".
Remarkably, the lower court judge agreed with the applicant that the municipal by-law was passed in bad faith and quashed it.
The Court of Appeal disagreed and overturned the lower court decision. Relying in part on case law from the Manitoba Court of Appeal, the Court of Appeal pointed out "there is ... no requirement that Council have evidence of anything before enacting a by-law. In particular, there is no requirement that Council have evidence of potential harm before enacting a by-law designed to prevent such harm."
The Ontario Court of Appeal noted the fundamental test for bad faith by a municipality requires "a lack of candour, frankness and impartiality. It includes arbitrary or unfair conduct and the exercise of power to serve private purposes at the expense of the public interest..."
The court concluded "[Mr. Hamer's] evidence fails to establish anything resembling bad faith in this case."
We hope that Mr. Hamer has since stopped feeding the bears. Don't we already have enough evidence of the harm to wildlife, and to the public, when wild predators are taught that humans are sources of food?
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.
