Cedarhill Golf Enterprises Inc. sought a declaration that a clause in a subdivision agreement (Schedule Y5) requiring the perpetual operation of a golf course on its property was ultra vires, invalid, and unenforceable.
The City of Ottawa contended that the subdivision agreement, including Y5, was enforceable against Cedarhill and its property.
Issues:
Whether Nepean (now part of Ottawa) had the statutory authority to enter into the subdivision agreement with Cedpar (Cedarhill's predecessor) in 1980.
Whether the subdivision agreement is enforceable as a contract or should be considered a planning instrument open to changes in law and policy.
Whether the agreement binds Cedarhill as a successor in title.
If Y5 creates contingent interests in land.
If Y5 amounts to a constructive taking.
Decision:
The court found Nepean had statutory authority to enter into the agreement and that it was enforceable as a contract.
Cedarhill, as a successor in title, was bound by the agreement, which was not seen as creating contingent interests in land or amounting to a constructive taking.
The court noted the parties' foresight in the agreement for a scenario where golf course operation was not commercially viable, suggesting a negotiated solution under clause 8 of Y5.
Outcome:
The application was adjourned for 120 days to allow for mediation, aiming for a resolution under clause 8 of Y5. Therefore, there was no outright successful party at this stage of the proceedings.
Assessment of costs was adjourned pending the mediation outcome.??
