Supreme Court of Canada
Ample Investments Ltd. v. North York (Township) et al., [1967] S.C.R. 181
Date: 1967-02-07
Ample Investments Limited (Applicant) Appellant;
and
The Municipal Corporation of The Township of North York and S.G. Beckett, Building Commissioner (Respondents) Respondents.
1966: June 23; 1967: February 7.
Present: Taschereau C.J. and Martland, Judson, Hall and Spence JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, allowing an appeal from a judgment of Brooke J. wherein it was declared that the plans as submitted by the applicant for a proposed apartment hotel had been approved within the meaning of s. 30(7) (b) of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1960, c. 296. Appeal allowed, Martland and Hall JJ. dissenting.
W.B. Williston, Q.C., R.J. Rolls and D.S. Affleck, for the appellant.
J.T. Weir, Q.C., and M. McQuaid, for the respondents.
The judgment of Taschereau C.J. and Judson and Spence JJ. was delivered by
JUDSON J.:—For the reasons given in Kalmen Mapa and Isadore Goldist v. The Municipal Corporation of the Township of North York and S.G. Beckett, Building Commissioner[1], I would allow this appeal with costs and make the same order.
The judgment of Martland and Hall JJ. was delivered by
MARTLAND J. (dissenting):—For the reasons given in Kalmen Mapa and Isadore Goldist v. The Municipal Corporation of the Township of North York and S.G. Beckett, Building Commissioner1, I would dismiss this appeal with costs.
Appeal allowed with costs, MARTLAND and HALL JJ. dissenting.
Solicitors for the appellants: Fasken, Calvin, MacKenzie, Williston & Swackhamer, Toronto.
Solicitors for the respondents: Arnup, Foulds, Weir, Boeckh, Morris & Robinson, Toronto.