Ecolex Logo
Le portail au
droit de l'environnement
Résultats de la recherche » Jurisprudence

Ben Sutcliffe and Helen Kimmerly, Applicants v. Minister of the Environment (Ontario) and Canadian Waste Services Inc, Respondents and between Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, Applicant and Minister of the Environment (Ontario) and Canadian Waste Services Inc., Respondents

Pays/Territoire
Canada
Type de cour
Nationale - cour supérieure
Date
Jui 17, 2003
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Nom du tribunal
Ontario Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court
Juge
Cunningham
Kurisko
Lang
Numéro de référence
572/00
Langue
Anglais
Sujet
Déchets et substances dangereuses, Questions juridiques
Mot clé
Élimination de déchets Gestion des déchets Autorisation/permis Procédures judiciaires/procédures administratives
Résumé
The applicants opposed the expansion of a Landfill Site by a company called Canadian Waste Services Inc. ("CWS"). CWS operated an existing landfill site and wished to expand its operation. In order to do so, it had to obtain approval from the Minister of the Environment under the Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.18 (the "Act"). CWS submitted to the Ministry terms of reference for the preparation of the environmental assessment that had to be completed before the undertaking could be ultimately approved. Under the Act, terms of reference had to be approved by the Minister for the project to continue. The Minister could only give his approval if he was satisfied that an environmental assessment, prepared in accordance with the terms of reference, would be consistent with the purpose of the Act and with the public interest. The TOR thus informed, governed, and limited the scope of the environmental assessment. CWS obtained ministerial approval of the terms of reference for its proposed expansion. The applicants, Ben Sutcliffe, Helen Kimmerly lived near the landfill while the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte occupied a nearby reserve. They were opposed to the proposed expansion and brought this application for judicial review of the Minister’s decision before the Divisional Court. The key issue rested on the statutory interpretation of the Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.18 (EAA). The TOR submitted by CWS did not satisfy the listed requirements of the EAA s. 6.1(2). Therefore the main issue was whether the Minister could approve terms of reference that were tailored to a particular project and that were found by the Minister to be consistent with the purpose of the Act and the public interest, but did not include all of the generic elements of an environmental assessment that were set out in the Act. The court was emphasizing that the purpose of the legislation in question was to protect Ontario’s environment. The question was one of statutory interpretation: What were the statutory requirements for TOR/Environmental Assessments? The answer to the question depended upon the correct interpretation of those requirements. In considering the meaning of the specific regulation, the court examined the purpose of the legislation, its context, and its legislative history. In conclusion, the court was of the view that the Act did not permit approval of the terms of reference because they were not drafted in accordance with certain specified requirements in the Act. Those requirements could be considered as setting out the "generic" elements of an environmental assessment. The court held that, while the Minister could require additional information from a proponent, the Act did not permit the approval of terms of reference that did not contain, at a minimum, those generic elements. In the result, the decision approving the TOR was quashed.
Texte intégral
COU-143800E.pdf
Site web
www.willmsshier.com

Références

Cites