Supreme Court

Decision Information

Duran v Inuvik (Town)

Court Supreme Court
Date 1991-06-27
File numbers CV 02976
Judge(s) de Weerdt
Location Yellowknife
Cases and statutes considered Cases considered:
ROBINSON V. GIANT YELLOWKNIFE MINES LIMITED (1987) N.W.T.R. 250 (S.C.);
C.P.R. V. TORONTO (1911) A.C. 461 (P.C.);
STEPNEY BOROUGH COUNCIL V. JOFFE (1949) 1 K.B. 599;
SAGNATA INVESTMENTS LTD. V. NORWICH CORPORATION (1971) 2 Q.B. 614;
FULHAM BOROUGH COUNCIL V. SANTILLI (1933) K.B. 357, 102 L.J.K.B. 728;
CARDINAL V. KENT INSTITUTION (1985) 2 S.C.R. 643;
HALLETT V. MINISTER OF PERSONNEL (1987) N.W.T.R. 263 (S.C.).

Statutes considered:
CITIES, TOWN AND VILLAGES ACT, 1987 (1ST) C. 14, S. 181;
NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT;
FOOD AND DRUGS ACT;
LIQUOR ACT
Decision information:

Abstract: Appeal against a decision by the Respondent to cancel a taxi driver's permit - Respondent cancelled the permit of the Applicant upon the Applicant's conviction of an indictable offence under the Criminal Code - Applicable licensing by-law prohibits issuing a license to anyone convicted of an indictable offence within five years of applying for a permit - Applicant contends that the decision to cancel the permit was made on insufficient facts to warrant the cancellation.
Decision: Appeal allowed - Respondent's decision to cancel permit void ab initio as based on the erroneous assumption that cancellation was the only option in the circumstances - Suspension was an option open to the Respondents but was not considered.
Subjects: Municipal law
Keywords: Licence - taxi driver - cancellation - suspension

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.