zone m – Traduction – Dictionnaire Keybot

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source	Q. Vous savez pourtant que les terrains en question, que vous avez fini par acheter, étaient dans une zone M-1?
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire	Q. Now you are aware that the lands in question that you eventually purchased were M‑1 zone?

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source	Q. Avez-vous précisé une zone M-1?
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire	Q. And did you specify a M-1 zone?

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source	En l’espèce, les terrains sont situés dans une zone M-3. Le règlement n’énumère que les usages permis pour les terrains situés dans une zone M.3, et l’art. 703 de ce règlement prévoit ce qui suit:
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire	In the present case, the lands were zoned M-3. The by-law only set out in particular the uses permitted for lands with an M.3 zone, and in para. 703 of the by-law provided:

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source	R. C’est exact car, à ma connaissance, il n’y avait presque plus de terrains disponibles dans une zone M-2 de la ville de Le Pas, sauf des terres réservées aux Indiens.
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire	A. That is correct because there was almost no M-2 land available other than Indian land in the Town of The Pas to my knowledge.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source	En l’espèce, les terrains sont situés dans une zone M-3. Le règlement n’énumère que les usages permis pour les terrains situés dans une zone M.3, et l’art. 703 de ce règlement prévoit ce qui suit:
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire	In the present case, the lands were zoned M-3. The by-law only set out in particular the uses permitted for lands with an M.3 zone, and in para. 703 of the by-law provided:

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

[TRADUCTION] La présente offre est soumise à la condition suivante: l’acheteur doit obtenir la modification du zonage desdits terrains sur la base d’une zone M-5. Cette modification du zonage doit avoir lieu dans un délai de 6 mois de la date de l’acceptation de l’offre.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

This offer is conditional upon the Purchaser obtaining the rezoning of the said lands on a M-5 zoning basis. Such rezoning to be obtained within 6 months from the date of the acceptance of the Offer. Provided that should the rezoning be approved by the Municipality of the Township of North York, and should it be before the Municipal Board within a six-month period, a further extension for the approval of the Municipal Board will be given for a period of 90 days, if the Municipal Board has not had an opportunity of giving its approval prior to the said extension date.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

En juin 1966, la ville a adopté le plan d’urbanisme et elle a réparti les terrains sis en ville en zones en stipulant de façon précise les usages autorisés dans chacune d’elles. Par les transactions que j’ai indiquées, l’intimée a acheté des terrains d’une zone M.1 et a demandé un permis d’exploitation pour une usine de traitement de la viande.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

In June 1966, the town enacted the Town Planning Scheme and divided the lands in the town into zones making exact provision for permitted uses in each of the zones. The respondent, through the transactions which I have outlined, bought lands in an M.1 zone, applied for a licence to operate a meat processing plant, the inspector inspected those premises and granted a licence. I can imagine no plainer example of the replacement of the earlier absolute bar by a subsequent detailed system of regulation, inspection and licence than the present one. Therefore, with respect, I differ with Matas J.A. in his conclusion that there is any fault attributable to the town in Mr. Moule’s failure to bring to the attention of Mr. Tawse the provisions of s. 26 of By-law 1284A.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

En 1966 la ville de Le Pas avait établi un plan d’urbanisme qu’elle avait sanctionné par le règlement 1487 adopté le 2 février 1966. Ce plan est considérable et très détaillé et je n’en mentionnerai que quelques extraits. L’article 16 indique ce qui est autorisé dans une zone M.l, industrie légère, et le par. (1) de l’art.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

The Town of The Pas had created a town planning scheme in the year 1966 and had adopted that scheme by By-law 1487 which was enacted on February 2, 1966. That scheme is very long and detailed and I need only refer to certain sections thereof. Section 16 established what was entitled as an M.1 light industrial area and in s. 16(1) outlined the permitted uses for structures in the M.1 area. The first of such permitted uses read “any manufacturing or industrial use conducted within an enclosed building or structure”. It was this permitted use upon which Mr. Tawse relied when he sought from Mr. Moule information as to lands available in the light industrial zone. It was the contention of the solicitors for Gibson and Kennedy that the use of premises in an M.1 zone was barred by the words of s. 7.9 of the said planning scheme enacted by By-law 1487. Section 7.9 read:

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

En 1966 la ville de Le Pas avait établi un plan d’urbanisme qu’elle avait sanctionné par le règlement 1487 adopté le 2 février 1966. Ce plan est considérable et très détaillé et je n’en mentionnerai que quelques extraits. L’article 16 indique ce qui est autorisé dans une zone M.l, industrie légère, et le par. (1) de l’art.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

The Town of The Pas had created a town planning scheme in the year 1966 and had adopted that scheme by By-law 1487 which was enacted on February 2, 1966. That scheme is very long and detailed and I need only refer to certain sections thereof. Section 16 established what was entitled as an M.1 light industrial area and in s. 16(1) outlined the permitted uses for structures in the M.1 area. The first of such permitted uses read “any manufacturing or industrial use conducted within an enclosed building or structure”. It was this permitted use upon which Mr. Tawse relied when he sought from Mr. Moule information as to lands available in the light industrial zone. It was the contention of the solicitors for Gibson and Kennedy that the use of premises in an M.1 zone was barred by the words of s. 7.9 of the said planning scheme enacted by By-law 1487. Section 7.9 read:

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

En 1966 la ville de Le Pas avait établi un plan d’urbanisme qu’elle avait sanctionné par le règlement 1487 adopté le 2 février 1966. Ce plan est considérable et très détaillé et je n’en mentionnerai que quelques extraits. L’article 16 indique ce qui est autorisé dans une zone M.l, industrie légère, et le par. (1) de l’art.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

The Town of The Pas had created a town planning scheme in the year 1966 and had adopted that scheme by By-law 1487 which was enacted on February 2, 1966. That scheme is very long and detailed and I need only refer to certain sections thereof. Section 16 established what was entitled as an M.1 light industrial area and in s. 16(1) outlined the permitted uses for structures in the M.1 area. The first of such permitted uses read “any manufacturing or industrial use conducted within an enclosed building or structure”. It was this permitted use upon which Mr. Tawse relied when he sought from Mr. Moule information as to lands available in the light industrial zone. It was the contention of the solicitors for Gibson and Kennedy that the use of premises in an M.1 zone was barred by the words of s. 7.9 of the said planning scheme enacted by By-law 1487. Section 7.9 read:

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

A mon avis, cette lettre ne contient absolument aucune déclaration d’opinion. Pour les raisons que j’ai déjà données, le bâtiment était conforme aux règlements de zonage car c’était un bâtiment entièrement fermé destiné à une industrie légère dans une zone M.1.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

I can find no representation whatsoever in that letter. For the reasons to which I have already referred, in my view, the building did comply with the zoning regulations in that it was a completely enclosed building for light industrial use in an M.1 area. If Matas J.A. was of the opinion that the letter was in error in its failure to take account of the provisions of s. 7.9 of the Planning Scheme By-law 1487, then it must be remembered that the letter is dated December 22, 1969, after the respondent had acquired the lands and commenced its building, and that to determine whether a use was within the prohibition in s. 7.9 of the said by-law required an exercise in judgment quite beyond the ordinary scope of a building inspector. There is, in fact, evidence that a provincial health inspector had informed members of the Council that all over the province slaughter-houses existed right in the middle of towns without any nuisance whatsoever and it is difficult to understand how, in the light of that statement from a provincial inspector, a municipal building inspector can be required to exercise a judgment that this building would, unlike others in the province, constitute such a nuisance as would bring it within the prohibition of the by-law. I am of the opinion that no liability of the town could be based on this slight ground.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

Il connaissait également les dispositions de l’art. 7.9 du plan et il en avait conclu que s’il entourait l’usine de murs afin de se conformer aux exigences prévues pour une zone M.1, il ne serait pas touché par les dispositions de cet article.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

Tawse already had seen and was generally aware of the contents of the planning scheme contained in By-law 1487 and had determined that the meat processing plant fell within the permitted use for lands zoned as light industrial. He was also aware of the provisions of s. 7.9 of the scheme and had formed the opinion that if he enclosed the whole of the plant within walls in order to bring it within the permitted use for M.1 zoning then he would not be affected y the provision in s. 7.9. In fact, Mr. Tawse admitted that he and his associates had altered the original plan for their building so as to provide for a total enclosure thereof in order to fit their building into the light industrial or M.1 zoning. It is true that Mr. Tawse did reveal to Mr. Moule, and later set out expressly in the letter signed by Messrs. Lutz and Melnick, that the enterprise to be carried on in the building was meat processing. But the advice which Mr. Tawse sought was not whether there were lands available for a meat processing enterprise but whether there were town owned lands in M.1, light industrial zone, and also whether the municipality could supply water and sewage facilities. I, therefore, can find no seeking of advice or information such as that required in the Hedley Byrne case.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

Il connaissait également les dispositions de l’art. 7.9 du plan et il en avait conclu que s’il entourait l’usine de murs afin de se conformer aux exigences prévues pour une zone M.1, il ne serait pas touché par les dispositions de cet article.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

Tawse already had seen and was generally aware of the contents of the planning scheme contained in By-law 1487 and had determined that the meat processing plant fell within the permitted use for lands zoned as light industrial. He was also aware of the provisions of s. 7.9 of the scheme and had formed the opinion that if he enclosed the whole of the plant within walls in order to bring it within the permitted use for M.1 zoning then he would not be affected y the provision in s. 7.9. In fact, Mr. Tawse admitted that he and his associates had altered the original plan for their building so as to provide for a total enclosure thereof in order to fit their building into the light industrial or M.1 zoning. It is true that Mr. Tawse did reveal to Mr. Moule, and later set out expressly in the letter signed by Messrs. Lutz and Melnick, that the enterprise to be carried on in the building was meat processing. But the advice which Mr. Tawse sought was not whether there were lands available for a meat processing enterprise but whether there were town owned lands in M.1, light industrial zone, and also whether the municipality could supply water and sewage facilities. I, therefore, can find no seeking of advice or information such as that required in the Hedley Byrne case.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source

Il connaissait également les dispositions de l’art. 7.9 du plan et il en avait conclu que s’il entourait l’usine de murs afin de se conformer aux exigences prévues pour une zone M.1, il ne serait pas touché par les dispositions de cet article.

Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire

Tawse already had seen and was generally aware of the contents of the planning scheme contained in By-law 1487 and had determined that the meat processing plant fell within the permitted use for lands zoned as light industrial. He was also aware of the provisions of s. 7.9 of the scheme and had formed the opinion that if he enclosed the whole of the plant within walls in order to bring it within the permitted use for M.1 zoning then he would not be affected y the provision in s. 7.9. In fact, Mr. Tawse admitted that he and his associates had altered the original plan for their building so as to provide for a total enclosure thereof in order to fit their building into the light industrial or M.1 zoning. It is true that Mr. Tawse did reveal to Mr. Moule, and later set out expressly in the letter signed by Messrs. Lutz and Melnick, that the enterprise to be carried on in the building was meat processing. But the advice which Mr. Tawse sought was not whether there were lands available for a meat processing enterprise but whether there were town owned lands in M.1, light industrial zone, and also whether the municipality could supply water and sewage facilities. I, therefore, can find no seeking of advice or information such as that required in the Hedley Byrne case.