Reasonableness and processes related to the home statute

17. December 2019 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Utility and Review Board – Statutory interpretation – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Jurisdiction – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness – Government – Municipal boards Cape Breton (Regional Municipality) v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General), [2019] N.S.J. No. 420, 2019 NSCA 77, Nova Scotia Court ...

The appeal by an operator of a coal-fired electricity generator (“Milner”) from a decision of the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (the “Board”) to refuse to investigate or hold a hearing arising from a complaint lodged by Milner was allowed where the complaint had arguable merit

28. September 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Utility and Review Board – Rules and by-laws – Natural resources – Electricity – Loss of electricity – Line Loss Rule – Judicial review – Investigations – Compliance with legislation – Statutory interpretation – Complaints lacking merit – Definition Milner Power Inc. v. Alberta (Energy and Utilities ...

The appeal by the Ontario Energy Board (the “Board”) from a decision of the Divisional Court declaring that it had exceeded its jurisdiction when it imposed, as a condition in its 2006 rate decision, a duty on the Toronto Hydro-Electric System Ltd. to obtain approval of the majority of its independent directors before declaring any future dividends payable to its affiliates was allowed where the court found that the Board had expressed concern about the level of dividend payments given that increased capital spending was required to address aging plant and to maintain system reliability and this was a reasonable explanation for imposing the condition

25. May 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Utility and Review Board – Natural resources – Electricity rates – Board of Directors – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Toronto Hydro-Electric System Ltd. v. Ontario (Energy Board), [2010] O.J. No. 1594, 2010 ONCA 284, Ontario Court of Appeal, April 20, ...

The Court of Appeal upheld the Utility and Review Board’s decision rejecting a licensed restaurant’s application to acquire unrestricted entertainment privileges. The legislation requires that the Board be satisfied that the operation of the premises to be licensed will not interfere with the quiet enjoyment of neighbouring properties, either public or private. The Board’s determination under this legislative provision was largely fact-driven. The Board’s finding that, on a balance of probabilities, permitting live entertainment on the premises would not be consistent with the quiet enjoyment provisions of the Regulations was reasonable. The Court of Appeal also held that even if the matter was a question of law, the Board’s decision satisfied the “correctness” standard.

27. November 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Utility and Review Board – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Permits and licences – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Whiskey’s Lounge Ltd. v. Nova Scotia (Utility and Review Board), [2007] N.S.J. No. 399, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, October 2, 2007, E.A. Roscoe, ...

The province unsuccessfully appealed from a decision of the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (the “Board”) that a man whose land had been expropriated (“Bishop”) was entitled to an Order directing a Discovery of the province’s expert appraiser

26. December 2006 0
Administrative law – Expropriation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Utility and Review Board – Practice and procedure – Administrative tribunals – Examination for discovery – Hearings – Appeals – Disclosure – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Correctness Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Bishop, [2006] N.S.J. NO. 411, Nova Scotia ...

Kings County succeeded in its appeal of a decision by the Nova Scotia Utility & Review Board, which had overturned a decision of the Municipal Council to enter into a Development Agreement allowing a property owner to carry on an excavation business in an area not zoned for that activity. The court found that the Board did not consider the appropriate issue of whether the Development Agreement carried out the intent of the Municipal Planning Strategy and instead, based its decision on improper factors, including complaints of nuisance by neighbouring landholders.

22. April 2003 0
Administrative law – Municipalities – Planning and zoning – Utility and Review Board – Jurisdiction Kings (County) v. Lutz, [2003] N.S.J. No. 56, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, February 18, 2003, Glube C.J.N.S., Chipman and Saunders JJ.A. Robert Parker carried on an excavation business from his residence in Kings County. His father had carried on ...