Brimley Progress Development Inc. v. Director, Ministry of the Environment

摘要

Environmental law-Statutory protection of environment - Approvals, licences and orders - Appeals - To court - Jurisdiction-Applicant owned vacant land, which it intended to develop with condominium units -Respondent operated paperboard plant, which operated under noise and emissions approval - Plant operators applied for updated approval, which was granted in October 2012 - Landowners disagreed with approval and applied for leave to appeal decision of environment ministry - Landowners requested further materials and extensions of time to make application - Landowners resolved issue of noise with plant owner - Landowners received materials and made motion to tribunal for leave to amend application - Landowners also moved for further disclosure of documentation from plant owner - Plant owner made cross-motion to strike portions of affidavit evidence - Landowners' motion dismissed-Deadline of 15 days in process was considered to be "hard" deadline, which required compelling circumstances to extend - Request for further material was made outside of time frame, without reasons why it could not have been made earlier - Documentary disclosure was within tribunals jurisdiction but was not typically ordered as part of leave to appeal process -There was no prima facie right on part of landowner to receive disclosure, over and above what was reasonable to allow them to make their case - It was not necessary to deal with cross-motion - Landowner was to indicate within 10 days whether there were any remaining issue with noise, as set out in application - If there were no remaining issues on this point, application for leave was to be dismissed.