|
Statutory Interpretation - Applies to Regulations Too. McDonald v. Aviva Insurance Company
In McDonald v. Aviva Insurance Company (Div Court, 2024) the Ontario Divisional Court allowed a LAT SABS appeal, here where the main issue was 'special awards' under s.10 ['Dispute Resolution (Section 280 of the Act)'] of Reg 664/90 ['Automobile Insurance'].
Here the court holds that the principles of statutory interpretation apply to regulations too:[39] These principles apply for both courts and tribunals: Vavilov, at para. 118. The rules governing statutory interpretation apply equally to regulations. A regulation must be read in the context of the enabling Act, having regard to the purpose of the enabling provisions: Ayr Farmers Mutual Insurance Company v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 789, at para. 27. . 2275518 Ontario Inc. v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank
In 2275518 Ontario Inc. v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank (Ont CA, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal of a partial summary judgement against the plaintiff.
Here the court notes that rules of statutory interpretation apply to regulations as well:[36] Further, I note that the principles of statutory interpretation apply equally to regulations, such as the Rules of Civil Procedure, subject to the proviso that they must also be read in the context of the enabling statute: Ayr Farmers Mutual Insurance Company v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 789, 134 O.R. (3d) 427, at para. 27. The modern approach to statutory interpretation requires that the words of a statute be read “in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament”: Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Re), 1998 CanLII 837 (SCC), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27, at para. 21, quoting from Elmer Driedger, Construction of Statutes, 2nd ed. (Toronto: Butterworths, 1983), at p. 87. See also Ayr Farmers, at para. 26.
|
