Supreme Court

Decision Information

Orr v Hutyra

Court Supreme Court
Date 1992-01-21
Other citations [1992] NWTR 178
File numbers CV 03465
Judge(s) de Weerdt
Location Yellowknife
Cases and statutes considered Cases considered:
Victoria Hotel Ltd. v. Winnipeg (City) (1958), 65 Man. R.. 413 (Q.B.)
Freeman v. Watts (1985), 38 Sask. R. 204 (Q.B.)
Re Chafe (1974) 10 N.S.R. 261 (C.A.)
Seaspray Properties Ltd. v. Fry (1981), 29 B.C.L.R. 270 (S.C.)
Athabasca Tribal Council v. Amoco Canada Petroleum Co. (1980), 12 Alta. L.R. (2d) 54 (C.A.)
O'Hanlon et al v. Foothills (Municipal District No 31) (1979) 11 M.P.L.R. 56 (Alta. C.A.)

Statutes considered:
Planning Act, R.S.N.W.T. 1988, c. P-7, s. 23(5)(b)
Planning Act, R.S.N.W.T. 1988, c. P-7, s. 51(2)(b)
City of Yellowknife, By-law No. 3424, Zoning By-Law
Decision information:

Abstract: Application for leave to appeal the decision of the Development Appeal Board. The Board had decided to revoke a development period. The Court considered the limitations in the Planning Act as to what constitutes notice of the decision to then initiate the 30 day appeal period. The Court found the originating notice had been filed in time. The Court then went on to consider whether or not leave to appeal should be granted and whether the Board had erred in making the decision they did to revoke the permit. The decision appeared to raise one or more questions of law.
Decision: Application for to Leave to Appeal granted.
Subjects: Planning and zoning - Planning authorities - Appeals

Decision Content

There is no document available for this decision.
 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.