Case information

Constitutional law — Interjurisdictional immunity — Federal railway undertaking — Municipal law — Bylaws — Local governments unsuccessfully applying for declarative and injunctive relief to subject federal railway undertaking to local municipal and provincial laws — Is a federal undertaking entitled to decide for itself that the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity (“IJI”) relieves it of any duty to comply with municipal or provincial laws of general application? — Is IJI triggered in every situation in which the application of a local law would require a federal undertaking to apply for a permit or approval merely because the commencement of such an application could hypothetically lead to an approval being denied or subjected to extraordinary delays? — What is the applicable precedent requirement that must be satisfied before IJI can be invoked by a private company carrying on a federal undertaking that seeks to avoid its obligation to comply with local laws?

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.

The underlying proceedings concern an application and appeal by the applicants, who make up several local governments (hereinafter “Halton”), for declarations and injunctions obligating the respondent Canadian National Railway Company (“CN”) to seek and obtain requisite approvals under more than 65 listed provincial laws, regulations, and municipal bylaws without constitutional constraint. The context behind these proceedings is the construction, by CN, of an “intermodal hub” in the town of Milton, Ontario, which has generated fierce local opposition. The installation will apparently enable shipping containers to be moved by freight train for most of their journey to and from the Greater Toronto Area, thereby reducing heavy truck traffic along the way. CN claims blanket immunity from municipal and other laws because the intermodal hub is a federal undertaking having received federal approval. The application judge denied the declarations and injunctions sought by Halton based on the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity. The Court of Appeal dismissed Halton’s appeal and leave to appeal the significant costs award imposed against it. It noted that the application judge was entitled to exercise discretion to deny the declaratory relief, and did so for cogent reasons, without committing extricable legal errors or palpable and overriding errors of fact. Similarly, the court found that no errors had been identified to deny the requested injunctive relief.