Court of Appeal

Decision Information

Decision Content

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

Citation: Northern Construction Enterprises Inc. v. Halifax (Regional Municipality), 2015 NSCA 43   

Date: 20150512

Docket: CA 412729

Registry: Halifax

Between:

Northern Construction Enterprises Inc.

Appellant

v.

The Halifax Regional Municipality,

The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board and

The Attorney General of Nova Scotia

Respondents

and

 

Dwight Ira Isenor and Staceylee Rudderham

Intervenors

 

Judge:

The Honourable Chief Justice Michael MacDonald

Appeal Heard:

February 11, 2015, in Halifax, Nova Scotia

Subject:

Administrative law; jurisdiction of Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board; municipal planning strategies and by-laws; Provincial authority over the location of quarries

Summary:

The Appellant, Northern Construction Enterprises Inc., (Northern) proposes to develop an aggregate quarry near the Halifax Stanfield International Airport. This appeal involves the Respondent Municipality’s (HRM) refusal to grant the Appellant a development permit to do so. This refusal was sustained by the Respondent Board, prompting Northern’s appeal to this Court. The Intervenors are concerned residents. Before the Board, the Appellant asserted that, because the Province controls the location of quarries within its boundaries, the HRM’s by-law purporting to exercise such control is illegal. It alternatively argued that, in any event, a permit should have been granted by the HRM. The Board concluded that it had no jurisdiction to question the legality of the impugned by-law and that there was no basis to overturn the HRM’s rejection. Before this Court, the Appellant argues that the Board erred on both fronts.

Issues:

1. Did the Board err in (a.) refusing to rule on the legality of the by-law or (b.) sustaining HRM’s decision to reject the Appellant’s application for its proposed aggregate quarry?

Result:

Appeal dismissed. The Board was correct not to question the legality of the by-law and was reasonable in sustaining the HRM’s decision.

This information sheet does not form part of the court’s judgment. Quotes must be from the judgment, not this cover sheet. The full court judgment consists of 20 pages.

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.