Williams Lake Conservation Co. v. Kimberly-Lloyd Developments Ltd., 2005 NSCA 44 (CanLII)

This case was heard in the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal.

After the Chebucto Community Council of Halifax Regional Municipality (“CCC”) approved the re-zoning of a tract of land from H (Holding) to RDD (Residential Development District), the Williams Lake Conservation Company (“WLCC”) appealed to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (“NSUARB”) and also applied to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia for an order quashing the CCC’s decision.

The NSUARB dismissed the WLCC’s appeal from the CCC’s approval of the re-zoning. The WLCC then applied to the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal for leave to appeal the NSUARB’s decision. Kimberly-Lloyd Developments Ltd. (“Kimberly-Lloyd”) owned the tract of land that had been re-zoned, and the company intended to create residential developments on the property. The company had status as an interested party in the appeal, and it asked the court for security for costs from the WLCC.

After consideration, the Court held that there were no grounds upon which to order security for costs from the WLCC, as the WLCC had not conducted itself in any way that would suggest an inability to pay costs if its appeal was unsuccessful. The Court therefore dismissed Kimberly-Lloyd’s application.

To read other decisions related to this case, go to Williams Lake Conservation v. Chebucto Community Council et al., 2003 NSSC 239 (CanLII) and Williams Lake Conservation v. Chebucto Community Council, 2004 NSCA 79 (CanLII).

View the Decision on CanLII: https://www.canlii.org/en/ns/nsca/doc/2005/2005nsca44/2005nsca44.html

Disclaimer:
Case briefs in our Resource Library are drafted by law students who work or volunteer with East Coast Environmental Law, and East Coast Environmental Law does not guarantee their fullness or accuracy. Library users should not rely on case briefs as comprehensive accounts of the issues, facts, reasoning, or outcomes at stake in any given case. 

If you require more detailed information about a court decision or legal issue, please consider using our Environmental Law Inquiry Service to request information from our staff.

Previous
Previous

R v Polches, 2005 NBQB 137

Next
Next

Dupere v. Evans, 2005 NSSM 39 (CanLII)