As a result, the respondent gave notice to the appellants and held a public hearing regarding its intention to pass a second resolution in similar wording to the first. After the hearing, on June 13, 2003, the respondent passed the second resolution, which also became the subject of litigation. In Kollen v. Vancouver (City) (2004), 49 M.P.L.R. (3d) 134, 2004 BCSC 684, Garson J. found that the decision of at least one of the eight councillors present was motivated by an erroneous assumption that the owners were breaking the law, when in fact the sign was, as noted above, merely “legal non-conforming”. On this basis, Garson J. quashed the second resolution.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.