Case information

Municipal law — By laws — Validity — Charter of rights — Freedom of expression — Whether boroughs of Ville de Montréal can prohibit use throughout their territory notwithstanding rule in municipal law against total prohibition, on ground that lawfulness of exercise of their power should be assessed on basis of entire territory of Ville de Montréal — Proper manner of assessing justification, under s. 1 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, for total prohibition against means of expression consisting of billboard media throughout borough of Ville de Montréal — In alternative, whether city can, absent express statutory authorization, end use for which there are acquired rights without compensation while providing only period of time described as [TRANSLATION] “amortization”.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

In June 2011, the applicant companies applied to the Superior Court for a declaration that the by laws prohibiting billboards in Plateau Mont Royal were unconstitutional. All of the applicants sought awards of punitive damages for intentional interference with their rights.

The Superior Court rejected the applicants’ argument that the by laws were an ultra vires exercise of the powers conferred on the borough. However, it found that the new by law provisions were unconstitutional because they infringed the freedom of expression provided for in the Charters in an unjustified manner. The Court of Appeal was divided. The majority agreed with the Superior Court that the by laws were intra vires, but unlike the Superior Court, the majority of the Court of Appeal found that even if the by laws infringed freedom of expression, the infringement was justified. Schrager J.A., dissenting, was of the view that the impugned by laws were ultra vires and unconstitutional.