Endnotes

[1] R.S.O.1990,c.P.33

[2] 2006,c.32,Schedule.A,s.45

[3] S.O.2001,c.25

[4] 2006,c.11 Schedule A ,s.81

[5] David J. Potts , “Municipal Systems of Administrative Penalties” , Prepared for the 2009 Municipal Court Managers’ Association Annual Conference May 31-June 3, 2009, unpublished at 2-3

[6] Angelo Cristofaro, as quoted in the Globe and Mail, Saturday April 10,2010 “Trimming the Fat from Toronto’s Police Budget “, by Kelly Grant  , at A12

[7] Courts of Justice Act R.S.O.1990,c.C.43,s.39(2)

[8] Online :http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/publications/salarydisclosure/2009 (last accessed 4 May, 2010)

[9] Online: http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/jpaac/en/qualification.htm (last accessed 28 March,2010)

[10] “Fairer and Better Environmental Enforcement,Summary of Responses and Government Response to the Consultation “ , held from 21st July to 14th October 2009, February 2010 at 4, par.5 ,online:http://www.defra.gov.uk (last accessed 10 May, 2010);  Richard B. Macrory ‘Regulatory Justice :Making Sanctions Effective .‘( November 2006) at 43 online:  http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file44593.pdf (last accessed 10 May, 2010)

The U.K. results on the public interest in a process for challenging AMPS was confirmed in an interview the author conducted on May 18, 2010 with  Janice Atwood-Petkovski, City Solicitor Commissioner of Legal and Administrative Services  and Tony Thompson ,Director of Enforcement, for the City of Vaughan.

[11] Note 2, 2006,c.32,Sch.A,s.45

[12] Note 4,  S.O. 2006,c.11 Schedule A,  s.81

[13] June 30,  2009 Online:http://www.city.vaughan.on.ca/vaughan/departments/enforcement/administrative penalties.cfm (last accessed 2 May, 2010)

(Last accessed 2 May, 2010 )

[14] Report of the Committee of Brampton City Council , February 17, 2010 at page 5 (Report of Council)

[15] Note 14, Report of Council , February 17, 2010 at 5

[16] Note 10, Author’s interview of May 18, 2010 with Janice Atwood-Petkovski, City Solicitor Commissioner of Legal and Administrative Services and Tony Thompson ,Director of Enforcement, for the City of Vaughan.

 

[17] Ramani Nadarajah, “Environmental Penalties:New Enforcement Tool or the Demise of Environmental prosecutions?”  in Stanley Berger and Dianne Saxe eds. Environmental Law The Year in Review 2007 (Aurora, Canada Law Book, 2007 ) 111at 114

[18] Michael Gerrard, “Enforcement of the New York City Sanitation Laws: Decriminalization and Court Reform”  , Fund for the City of New York ;unpublished September, 1976 and telephone interview with Professor Gerrard, Columbia University March 18, 2010

[19] Van Harken et al. v City of Chicago 103 F.3d1346;1997 U.S. App.Lexis 172 (U.S.C.A. Seventh Circuit) at 1349-50 (Van Harken)

[20] Van Harken ,Note19 at page 1351

[21] Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982, (U.K.) 1982, c. 11

[22] John Swaigen, Regulatory Offences in Canada, Liability and Defences (Toronto,  Carswell 1992) at p.18 see further R v. Fitzpatrick (1995) 18 C.E.L.R.(N.S.)237(S.C.C.)at par. 34 as it relates to s.7 of the Charter of Rights and the protection against self-incrimination and par. 49 as it relates to s.8 of the Charter and the protection  against unreasonable search and seizure; R.v Richard [1996] 3 S.C.R. 525 at par. 30 and Rv. Transport Robert  (1973) Ltée (2004), 234 D.L.R. (4th) 546, leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused 236 D.L.R. (4th)viii both of which deal with s.7 of the Charter .

[23] R.v Wholesale Travel Group Inc. [1991]3 S.C.R.154 at par.129  (Wholesale Travel)

[24] Wholesale Travel,  Note23 at par. 130 of Cory J.’s reasons

[25] Rv. Transport Robert  ,Note 22

[26] R.S.O.1990,c.H.8 s.84.1(5)

[27] Ontario Regulation 333/07 and Ontario Regulation 611/06 ;ss.9(2)

[28] Rule 20.10 & Rule 20.11 Rules of the Small Claims Court ,Justice Marvin A. Zuker,  Ontario Small Claims Court Practice (Toronto, Carswell,2010)

[29] Re: parking see :Toronto (City) v. Bowman (2002)  Carswell, Ont 5818; 2002 O.J. No.3803 (Ont.C.J.)at par.104 ; Re speeding offence : London (City) v.Polewsky,[2005]O.J.no.4500,202C.C.C.(3d) 257(C.A.);leave to appeal to the S.C.C. dismissed 2006 CarswellOnt 3307,[2006]S.C.C.A.37 (S.C.C)

[30] The Ontario Court of Appeal in R.v  Kanda (2008), 289 D.L.R. (4th)304 (Ont.C.A.) at par. 40 and R.v Raham [2010] O.J.No.1091 (Ont.C.A.)at par.44 accepts that due diligence can be excepted as a defence by implication

 

[31] Vaughan By-Law 156-2009 , Note13,  s.10.1 (10) (i) – (ii).

[32] R v. Fitzpatrick (1995) 18 C.E.L.R.(N.S.)237(S.C.C.) at par.53  Note 21

[33] Van Harken, Note19 at 1351, Similarly,  the New York City Environmental Control Board advises on its website On line : http://www.nyc.gov/html/ecb/html/home/home.shtml,(last accessed March 18, 2010) that the inspector who wrote the violation notice will likely not be present though a lawyer for the building department will.

[34] Note13,s. 10.1(16)

[35] Statutory Powers Procedure Act R.S.O. 1990,c. S.22; at s.12(1)

[36] Note 27 ;s.8(4)

 

[37] Canadian Environmental Protection Act (C.E.P.A ).1999, c. 33, s. 260(1)

[38] 2009, c. 14, s. 126, in s.2   (definitions) and s.15ff. (review )

[39] Note 27 ;s.8(1) subsection 3

[40] Note 27;s.8(1)  subsection 4

[41] Note 27;s.8(1) subsection 5-6

[42] Note 27;s.8(1) subsection 7

[43] Note 27 ;s.8(5)

[44] Note 13 s.10.1(11)

[45] R.S.O. 1990, c.S.22;  Note 27 s.8(4) and Note 13 , s.10.1 (17),  Note13

[46] Note13 , s.10.1(10)and (15)

[47] The inapplicability of the Provincial Offences Act once the AMPS Parking By-Law has been enacted is found in Section 4 of both Ontario Regulation 333/07 under the Municipal Act and  Ontario Regulation 611/06 of the City of Toronto Act Note 13 . Section 182.1(11) of the Ontario Environmental Protection Act R.S.O. E-19 allows concurrent prosecution and issuance of AMPS Orders.

[48] s. 7:1E-6.2(e) of the New Jersey’s Discharges of Petroleum and other Hazardous Substances  7 N.J.A.C.7:1E(2007)

[49] R.v Wigglesworth[1987] 2 S.C.R. 541 (Wigglesworth) at par.22 of Madame Justice Wilson’s reasons

[50] Martineau v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) [2004] 3 S.C.R.737;2004 SCC 81 (Martineau)

[51] Note 50at par. 24 of Fish J.’s reasons

[52] Note 27 ;ss.3(2)The emphasis on compliance is further evident in s.6(b) which provides that the penalty shall “not exceed the amount reasonably required to promote compliance with a designated by-law”

[53] Wholesale Travel , Note23

[54] Martineau ,Note 50 at par.38 of Fish J.’s reasons.

[55] Lavallee v Alberta (Securities Commission ) (2009) ABQB 17 at pars 157-163; Euston Capital Corporation v.Saskatchewan Financial Services Commission [2008] S.J.No.99 ;307 Sask.R.100 (Sask.C.A.) at par..51; Re Cartaway Resources Corp.,2004 SCC 26 [2004] 1 S.C.R.672

 
 
 
 
 

 

[56] Note 27, s. 6

[57] S.15(1) b of the Provincial Offences Act and the definition  of  “Set Fine “, section 1 Note1.

[58] Martineau Note 50 at par. 62

[59] O. Reg. 222/07

[60] May 2007; online: http://www.ene.gov.on.ca./en/about/penalties/EPguidelines.pdf ;http://www.ene.gov.on.ca./en/about/penalties/BenefitProcedure.pdf (last accessed May 5, 2010)