A long-awaited court case, medications in which the City of Ottawa’s legal representative meticulously set the facts before a judge, ask was dismissed today by a provincial court judge due to lack of prima facie evidence.
What salient piece of evidence (prima facie) did the lawyer for the City of Ottawa fail to submit to the court? Evidence that the property in question, try 152 Daniel Ave., exists within the City of Ottawa.
The case was initiated last fall by Forestry Services. It was the first instance where the Urban Tree Conservation By-law (in force since 2009) was being upheld and a property owner was officially charged by By-law Services for allegedly causing damage to a distinctive tree. This prosecution under the By-law had ramifications for the protection and security of mature trees across the city’s urban zone.
Sadly, today’s fiasco in court means that those of us anxious to see what the courts might provide as punishment for this kind of infraction will need to wait for another case. There is no shortage of instances where trees more than 50 cm in diameter on private property are being damaged by infill and large-scale housing construction in Kitchissippi Ward and elsewhere in Ottawa.
Eventually, Forestry Services will have its day in court.