What is the effect of section 3(a) of the Montreal Municipal Bylaw on the rule of construction in the context of "noise which annoys, disturbs or detracts from the comfort, repose, health, peace or safety of other persons"?

Having regard to the rule of construction defined by Driedger and applying the principles set out in Montreal v. Arcade Amusements Inc., it is my view that when s. 3(a) is read together with ss. 3(b) and 3(c) and considering the objective of the bylaw, the qualifying words "which annoys, disturbs, injures, endangers or detracts from the comfort, repose, health, peace or safety of other persons" are intended to modify each of the four prohibitions categorized by the trial judge and not just "any noise whatsoever". Such interpretation gives effect to the object of the bylaw which I perceive to have been intended as a general prohibition of any noise which either annoys, disturbs … other persons, regardless of whether such noise may be found loud, unnecessary or unusual. Actually, those impugned terms are really descriptive surplusage, in my opinion.