Court Cases
Case: City of Calgary (Appellant) v. United Taxi Drivers’ Fellowship of Southern Alberta et al (Respondents), [2004] 1 S.C.R. 485, 2004 SCC 19
Link: complete document, (pdf format) or weblink
Synopsis of this case:
The City of Calgary regulates its taxi industry by virtue of the Taxi Business Bylaw which requires that all taxis have a taxi plate licence. In 1993, the bylaw froze the number of taxi plate licences issued. The following year, the provincial government enacted a new Municipal Government Act. The respondents challenged the validity of the freeze on the issuance of taxi plate licences on the basis that the freeze is ultra vires the City under its governing legislation, the Municipal Government Act.
The City of Calgary regulates its taxi industry by virtue of the Taxi Business Bylaw which requires that all taxis have a taxi plate licence.
In 1993, the bylaw froze the number of taxi plate licences issued. The following year, the provincial government enacted a new Municipal Government Act. The respondents challenged the validity of the freeze on the issuance of taxi plate licences on the basis that the freeze is ultra vires the City under its governing legislation, the Municipal Government Act.
Decision: The appeal should be allowed. The City of Calgary was authorized under the Municipal Government Act to enact the bylaw and to limit the number of taxi plate licences. Municipalities must always be correct in delineating their jurisdiction. Such questions will always be subject to a standard of review of correctness.
Decision: The appeal should be allowed.
The City of Calgary was authorized under the Municipal Government Act to enact the bylaw and to limit the number of taxi plate licences. Municipalities must always be correct in delineating their jurisdiction. Such questions will always be subject to a standard of review of correctness.
Case: Associated Cab Limousine Ltd (appellant). v. City of Calgary (Respondent), 2009 ABCA 181
Essentially, the appellants submit that the City has gone beyond the jurisdiction granted to it by the Act, as its purpose was to limit competition, a power not expressly granted to it. The appellants say that, as limiting competition interferes with the common law rights, a strict interpretation of the powers granted by the Act must be adopted by this court.
Excerpts from this case:
Decision: The appeal is dismissed.
Much of the argument in support of this appeal seeks to have the court reconsider the decision made by City Council and to conclude that there are better ways of achieving the results desired by Council. The appellants say that the imposition of a minimum hourly rate was unnecessary or unreasonable and was based on insufficient evidence. We have concluded that Council had the power to pass the Livery Transport Bylaw. The other questions are for City Council and not for the court.
Much of the argument in support of this appeal seeks to have the court reconsider the decision made by City Council and to conclude that there are better ways of achieving the results desired by Council. The appellants say that the imposition of a minimum hourly rate was unnecessary or unreasonable and was based on insufficient evidence.
We have concluded that Council had the power to pass the Livery Transport Bylaw. The other questions are for City Council and not for the court.
[next page]
©votersfortaxis.ca