tu
’

Mr.-Ronald A. Freeman -

March 25, 1982

serve gas stations applies even more strongly to Port Coquitlam
for the number of licences it issués for coffee truck wagons be-
cause the Municipal Act is more restrictive than the Vancouver
Charter in the powers given to Council for the licensing of busi-
nesses.

Section 508 of the Act empowers the Council to "refuse
in any particular case to grant the request of an applicant for
a licence" but concludes with the wording "but the granting or
renewal of a licence shall not be unreasonably refused". A Court
might regard as unreasonable the refusal of a licence on the
ground that six have already been issued but New Westminster's
Council was successful in Regina v. City of New Westminster ex
Parte Wire Vision Ltd. (1965) 54 W.W.R. 238. There the British
Columbia Supreme Court (in a decision affirmed on appeal to the
British Columbia Court of Appeal) stated that the Council's refusal
was reasonable in that Council felt it was not economically viable
to have two competing companies. However, the wording of the
resolution of refusal would have to be carefully considered because
now a subsequent Court would be at least as likely to regard this
matter as covered by the recent Vancouver decision rather than
the earlier New Westminster ruling.

The City of Victoria is reputed to have utilized Section
527(h) of the Act in a manner similar to that now proposed by
Port. Coquitlam and those affected by the regulation evidently
ultimately decided against challenging it. Should Port Coquitlam
Council decide it wishes to proceed would then attempt at limita-
tion, it would be useful to obtain from Victoria the details of
their experiences.

Hence, while Council does not have the power to limit
in its bylaw the number of business licences it issues, it may
find success in Court on the grounds that its refusal to issue
one was reasonable (as occurred in the New Westminster decision).

As well, Council does have the power pursuant to Section 527 (h)
to regulate businesses (subject always to the limiting preamble
of Section 526) and so by this route could limit the number of
coffee truck wagons permitted to operate. The problem here is
that Section 527(h) limits its application to the sale or market-
ing of things "in a street or public place". We are advised that
these coffee truck wagons often stop on private property so the
question then becomes one of whether this private property would,
for the purposes of Section 527(h) of the Act, be deemed to be

a "public place" (for example, a shopping centre parking lot).

RMM:cl Roderick MM. MacKenzie

cc: Mr. Bryan Kirk, City Administrator

i]