Hello all
Recently my local Airpark has been looking into c/out a runway expansion and maybe building some additional hangers
However he is getting all kinds of road blocks from Provincial and Municipal levels
I have consistently been told for years that Airport Development fall under Federal jurisdiction and only they can dictate to the Airport Owner. This is covered under a law or act that I cannot recall the name of .
Can anyone direct or link me to the actual Government site that states this ???
Thanks in advance
Airport/Airpark/Aerodrome Expansion
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Airport/Airpark/Aerodrome Expansion
...isn't he the best pilot you've ever seen?....Yeah he is ....except when I'm shaving.........
Re: Airport/Airpark/Aerodrome Expansion
Google for "federal jurisdiction airports"
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Re: Airport/Airpark/Aerodrome Expansion
How about this
http://www.flightsource.ca/blog/flightd ... -aviation/
http://www.flightsource.ca/blog/flightd ... -aviation/
Re: Airport/Airpark/Aerodrome Expansion
Hope things go through with this, I've only been there once (assuming this is Guelph) but it's a nice little spot, and sure has potential to grow into more than it is. With GA airports closing it's nice to see one potentially growing!
Re: Airport/Airpark/Aerodrome Expansion
Here's the word from TC (From searching 'federal jurisdiction airports'):
https://www.tc.gc.ca/ca-opssvs/AC_300-009E.pdf
https://www.tc.gc.ca/ca-opssvs/AC_300-009E.pdf
Low time PPL
Re: Airport/Airpark/Aerodrome Expansion
Isn't COPA supposed to help with this kind of thing...
Re: Airport/Airpark/Aerodrome Expansion
This type of case deals with the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity. A bit of history. (Sorry the style's may be a bit off, I'm going from memory- you can look them up on CANLii by style or just search "interjurisdictional immunity")
Johanssen, 1954: SCC reads into the constitution that aeronautics is exclusively under the federal jurisdiction under the peace, order and good government clause of the Constitution.
Construction Mont-Calm: provincial minimum wage laws apply to employees of a contract hired to build a runway.
Bell v. Quebec, c. 1984: Provincial statues are inapplicable if they "affect" an "integral part" of the federal powers.
Air Canada v. LCBO: Provincial liquor laws apply to airlines because the serving of alcohol is not an "integral part" of aeronautics.
GTAA v. Mississauga: Municipal building and development codes do not apply to the construction of airports, specifically terminal buildings, and control tower.
Canada Western Bank v. Alberta, c. 2007: Standard for interjurisdictional immunity changed from "affects" to "impairs" the "core of the federal competency". Provincial insurance laws apply to federally regulated banks because the banks are doing something that falls under provincial jurisdiction. Introduction of "cooperative federalism".
COPA v. Quebec, c. 2010: Provincial agricultural protection laws are inapplicable to small private aerodromes.
Vancouver Airport case, c. 2012: evidence for impairment does not need to be concrete. Possibility of impairment is sufficient.
Here's a good one: http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/20 ... bqb641.pdf
Even though the SCC has made it clear that the construction of aerodromes are under federal jurisdiction, lesser governments will still claim that there is no "impairment" and will use their lawyers to deal with you. In the end though, you have to make sure your facts support your cause. If you claim to be "developing" an airport, but really using airport property to try to get around provincial laws, you'll lose, as did the guys in Burlington.
My advice (take it for what you paid for it) is to ignore the the municipality and province and just build your runway. Let them come to you. That way you aren't wasting time with a judicial review which will cost you $$$. If they come to you, it's a significantly shorter and cheaper legal process.
What airport are you associated with?
If you have any questions or need help, feel free to send a PM. I'm pretty familiar with this topic. If you want the best lawyer you can find (and pay for), I'd contact Mahmud Jamal at Osler, Hoskin, Harcourt. He was counsel in the GTAA case. The lawyer for COPA is now a Superior Court Justice so he's not available. You can also call COPA. Good luck.
Johanssen, 1954: SCC reads into the constitution that aeronautics is exclusively under the federal jurisdiction under the peace, order and good government clause of the Constitution.
Construction Mont-Calm: provincial minimum wage laws apply to employees of a contract hired to build a runway.
Bell v. Quebec, c. 1984: Provincial statues are inapplicable if they "affect" an "integral part" of the federal powers.
Air Canada v. LCBO: Provincial liquor laws apply to airlines because the serving of alcohol is not an "integral part" of aeronautics.
GTAA v. Mississauga: Municipal building and development codes do not apply to the construction of airports, specifically terminal buildings, and control tower.
Canada Western Bank v. Alberta, c. 2007: Standard for interjurisdictional immunity changed from "affects" to "impairs" the "core of the federal competency". Provincial insurance laws apply to federally regulated banks because the banks are doing something that falls under provincial jurisdiction. Introduction of "cooperative federalism".
COPA v. Quebec, c. 2010: Provincial agricultural protection laws are inapplicable to small private aerodromes.
Vancouver Airport case, c. 2012: evidence for impairment does not need to be concrete. Possibility of impairment is sufficient.
Here's a good one: http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/20 ... bqb641.pdf
Even though the SCC has made it clear that the construction of aerodromes are under federal jurisdiction, lesser governments will still claim that there is no "impairment" and will use their lawyers to deal with you. In the end though, you have to make sure your facts support your cause. If you claim to be "developing" an airport, but really using airport property to try to get around provincial laws, you'll lose, as did the guys in Burlington.
My advice (take it for what you paid for it) is to ignore the the municipality and province and just build your runway. Let them come to you. That way you aren't wasting time with a judicial review which will cost you $$$. If they come to you, it's a significantly shorter and cheaper legal process.
What airport are you associated with?
If you have any questions or need help, feel free to send a PM. I'm pretty familiar with this topic. If you want the best lawyer you can find (and pay for), I'd contact Mahmud Jamal at Osler, Hoskin, Harcourt. He was counsel in the GTAA case. The lawyer for COPA is now a Superior Court Justice so he's not available. You can also call COPA. Good luck.
