The community association successfully applied for judicial review of a decision by the City of Vancouver and Development Permit Board approving a rezoning bylaw and issuing a development permit for construction of a 36-storey mixed use tower. The court quashed the bylaw and development permit, and directed new hearings, finding that the public hearing process was flawed. The bylaw and development permit arose out of a negotiation between the city and developer for a land exchange proposal, whereby the parties would swap properties across the street from one another and the developer would renovate its former building to provide the city with affordable housing units and obtain rezoning of the former city building so that it could construct a 36-storey tower. The court found that the procedure adopted by the city was unfairly restrictive and directed new hearings which would permit concerned citizens to address the whole project, including the essence and value of the land exchange to the city and its residents.

24. March 2015 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Municipal councils – Municipalities – By-laws – Change of by-laws – Planning and zoning – Notice and consultation – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Disclosure of documents – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence Community Assn. of New Yaletown v. City of Vancouver, ...

The Applicant school boards unsuccessfully appealed the decision of the Respondent Workplace Safety and Insurance Board denying the Applicants access to their employees’ information

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – School boards – Disclosure of record – Workers compensation – Benefits – Subrogated actions – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Disclosure of records – Judicial review – Disclosure of records – Compliance with legislation – Applications – Premature Lambton Kent District School Board v. ...

The appellants were charged with three summary conviction offences relating to tax evasion under the Excise Tax Act. Before trial, the Crown refused to produce or disclose 55 items of information. Among those items were two items revealing the identity of other taxpayers, which the Crown maintained constituted confidential information, and three legal opinions for which the Crown claimed solicitor-client privilege. The trial judge ordered production of these items, a decision that was overturned on judicial review. The appeal of the judicial review was dismissed.

22. February 2005 0
Administrative law – Judicial review – Disclosure of documents – Jurisdiction – Failure to provide reasons – Evidence Chapelstone Developments Inc. v. Canada, [2004] N.B.J. No. 450, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, December 2, 2004, Turnbull, Robertson and Richard JJ.A. The trial judge ordered production of these five items, but failed to give reasons for ...