Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

Citation: Kings (County) v Berwick (Town), 2010 NSSC 128

 

Date: 20100412

Docket: Ken No 318509

Registry: Kentville

 

 

Between:

Municipality of the County of Kings

 

Applicant

v.

 

Town of Berwick, Town of Hantsport, Town of Kentville,

Town of Wolfville, Annapolis Valley Regional School Board and

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Nova Scotia

 

Respondents

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIBRARY HEADING

 

 

 

Judge:                         The Honourable Justice Gregory M. Warner

 

Heard:                                    March 9 and 16, 2010, at Kentville, Nova Scotia

 

 

Subject:                                   Contract Interpretation

 

 

Summary:                               For 28 years, the four municipalities in Kings County have paid their share of public education to the Kings County District School Board (now Annapolis Valley School Board) in proportion to their respective share of student enrolment (“per student”) pursuant to a written agreement dated January 21, 1982.  The agreement was amended on May 10, 1989, to permit the Town of Hantsport to join.  The agreement, as amended, contains no clause respecting termination.

 


The Education Act states that each municipality will fund the school board by reference to its respective share of uniform assessment “unless an agreement made and approved pursuant to Section 42 [now Section 27] otherwise provides, ...”  The 1982 agreement, as amended in 1989, was so approved.

 

 

Issue:                                      Kings seeks a declaration that the 1982 agreement does not provide for municipal contributions on a per student basis; if so, the agreement was ultra vires and, alternatively, the agreement should be terminated either on a basis of frustration or on basis that the agreement is not perpetual and it should be able to unilaterally terminate it on reasonable notice.

 

 

Result:                                    The agreement provided for per student contributions by the municipalities as a matter of interpretation.  Alternatively, Kings is estopped from denying this intent.  The Court would rectify the agreement if interpretation was otherwise.

 

The agreement is not ultra vires the Education Act.

 

Frustration has not been established. 

 

The agreement is not unilaterally terminable on reasonable notice.

 

 

THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.  QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 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.