Supreme Court


Notice of reserve pursuant to Cities and Towns Act (Que.) and Expropriation Act (Que.) was ultra vires province

Pursuant to his powers under Radiocommunication Act (Can.), minister of industry authorized R Inc. to install antenna system on certain property in respondent municipality for purpose of improving its cellular telephone network. Municipality, arguing that health and well-being of people living near such installation would be at risk, adopted municipal resolution authorizing service of notice of establishment of reserve (notice of reserve) that prohibited all construction on property in issue for two years pursuant to Cities and Towns Act (Que.) and Expropriation Act (Que.). Few days before notice was due to lapse, it was renewed for two additional years. R Inc. filed motion to contest notice. Motion judge annulled notice of reserve and its renewal, as well as resolutions on which they were based. Appeal from motion judge’s decision was allowed. R Inc. appealed. Appeal allowed. In light of purpose and effects of notice of reserve, its pith and substance was siting of radiocommunication antenna system, which represented exercise of federal jurisdiction. Notice was ultra vires province. In circumstances, notice impaired core of federal power over radiocommunication in that it compromised orderly development and efficient operation of radiocommunication in Canada. In addition, it was inapplicable to R Inc. by reason of doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity.

Rogers Communications Inc. c. Châteauguay (Ville) (Jun. 16, 2016, S.C.C., McLachlin C.J.C., Abella J., Cromwell J., Moldaver J., Karakatsanis J., Wagner J., Gascon J., Côté J., and Brown J., 36027) Decision at 242 A.C.W.S. (3d) 342 was reversed. 266 A.C.W.S. (3d) 390.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?