519 672 2121
Close mobile menu

That is what an Ontario developer tried to do. In Gatta Homes v. St. Catharines, the developer purchased land adjacent to an old landfill site, now a municipal park. He knew there was some waste on the parcel he was buying, which he intended to convert to 10 residential units. Once he discovered that municipal setback requirements would limit the development potential of the land, he sued the city in nuisance,  negligent misrepresentation, negligence, and trespass. He also demanded that the municipality remove all waste from his property and within 30 m of his property boundary; he also sought an injunction and punitive damages, and  compensatory damages of $1,019,707.82. He was unsuccessful in all respects.As Judge Taliano said:

the City is within its rights to pass measures to protect its citizens from developments that might threaten the health and safety of its inhabitants and equally obligated to insulate them from costly remedial measures…

I have never understood why so many people think they can knowingly buy a contaminated site and then force someone else to clean it up. Other than the Newfoundland Cousins case, I don’t know of anyone in Canada who has been successful with this approach, and even Mr. Cousins was probably not happy with the results he achieved. Nevertheless, it remains surprisingly popular.

News & Views


The more you understand, the easier it is to manage well.

View Blog

Neurological imaging to prove brain injury in medical negligence litigation

A brain injury is when cell death occurs in the brain, which can affect an individual’s capa…

Take note: employers may be responsible for paying CPP and EI premiums on employee tips and gratuities

According to a recent Federal Court of Appeal decision, employers who receive electronic tip…