Generally an injunction is not available to restrain the breach of legislation -- the punishment sections of the legislation are there to accomplish enforcement.
But where those sections clearly fail an injunction may go as in Lakehead Region Conservation v. Demichele, 2010 ONCA 480.
Here the Court held:
[1] In the ordinary course it would be appropriate for the Conservation Authority to rely on the penal provisions of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, to ensure compliance. However, this is not an ordinary situation. The appellant has a history of developing land without a permit. To some extent the application judge found this conduct was condoned by the Authority and that they were aware of at least some of the appellant's conduct.
[2] However, the appellant's clearly stated intention to continue with this activity after being asked to stop by the Authority and his statement that he had no intention of seeking a permit from the Authority, justified the granting of the injunction.
[3] While the Authority regulates the use of private property, it does so for a public purpose, protection of wetland environment. In this case there is a public interest in ensuring compliance with the Act. The application judge fully considered all the applicable principles set out in Pharmascience Inc. v. Binet, [2006] 2 S.C.R. 513. We agree with her decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment