|
[12] By-law No. 210, Sch. B, contains the zoning charts for the municipality. These charts authorize certain uses in each zone. A party may apply for a permit wherever a particular use is authorized. Initially, the zoning chart contained no box for “water aerodromes” or “aeronautics”. The parties to the present appeal agree that in light of this silence, the by-law was interpreted to permit water aerodromes by analogy to other approved uses. The Attorney General of Quebec presents this interpretation in paras. 11 and 39 of its factum. Moreover, the parties argued this appeal on the basis of their shared understanding that by‑law No. 210 did not prohibit the landing and taking off of hydroplanes at the relevant location and that the amendment brought about by by‑law No. 260[3] was necessary to achieve that result. This shared understanding is reflected in both their written and oral submissions in this Court. While the proper interpretation of the provisions is debatable, the parties’ shared understanding of the interpretation is plausible and I do not think the Court should approach the case on a basis that does not reflect that shared understanding on which all of the submissions of the parties were formulated.
|