Denitza Koev acted alongside Stephen D’Agostino in this Court application to quash a by-law commencing expropriation proceedings to acquire our client’s property. The position that the Thomson Rogers team advanced on behalf of the owner was that the Town’s by-law contravened s. 24 of the Planning Act because it was out of step with the Town’s Official Plan. Although the by-law in question was deemed to be out of step with the Town’s Official Plan, the Court found that it fell within one of the exceptions to the general rule that no public work can be undertaken and no by-law can be passed that is not in conformity with a municipality’s official plan. A key factor in the Court’s decision was that the by-law only intended to give notice that the Town was making an application to expropriate the land. The by-law did not go so far as to bring into effect the actual expropriation of the land.
Notably, Justice Nakatsuru clarified that if the Town had passed a by-law that actually expropriated the land, then the expropriating by-law would be contrary to s. 24 of the Planning Act. This case serves as a caution to municipalities that exercise their expropriating powers to ensure that they are doing so within the scope of their official plans.
