The legislature is presumed not to intend to abolish, limit, or otherwise interfere with the established common law or statutory rights, including property rights, in the absence of explicit statutory language that it intends to do so

Hamilton (City) v. The Equitable Trust Company, 2013 ONCA 143 holds:

[34] In addition to the foregoing considerations, it would be contrary to another well-entrenched principle of statutory interpretation to give effect to the City's submissions. The legislature is presumed not to intend to abolish, limit, or otherwise interfere with the established common law or statutory rights, including property rights, in the absence of explicit statutory language that it intends to do so: see Parry Sound (District) Social Services Administration Board v. Ontario Public Services Employees Union, [2003] 2 S.C.R. 157, at para. 39;Morguard Properties Ltd. et. al. v. City of Winnipeg, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 493, at pp. 508-511; Crystalline Investments Ltd. v. Domgroup Ltd., 2004 SCC 3, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 60, at para. 43; and 80 Mornelle Properties Inc. v. Mala Properties Ltd., 2010 ONCA 850, 99 R.P.R. (4th) 21, at para. 42.