Sandamali had been running a business in a small municipality for a number of years. She wasn't always up to dat e on the relevant legal issues facing her business, but she always acted ethically and treated her customers well. After a number of notices from the municipality went unanswered, Sandamali had her business licence withdrawn. Which of the following would not be grounds upon which she might challenge the decision?
A) The legislation was invalid under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
B) The provincial government did not have authority to pass the legislation under section 92 of the Constitution Act (1867).
C) The regulations relied on were not authorized by statute.
D) The legislation was intra vires.
E) The legislation was an attempt by the provincial government to pass criminal law legislation under the guise of a provincial power.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Option D (The legislation was intra vires) would not be grounds to challenge the decision because "intra vires" means that the legislation was within the authority of the government that passed it. Therefore, Sandamali could not use this argument to challenge the decision to withdraw her business licence. Options A, B, C, and E all refer to potential jurisdictional or constitutional issues that Sandamali may be able to argue in challenging the decision.

Sandamali Had Been Running a Business in a Small Municipality