9 hours ago
9
In 2023, an Ontario court banned backyard burning after neighbours complained of smoke; three years later, repeated incidents ended with a ban on barbecues and any fire-producing device/Image: Getty Images
An Ontario man at the centre of a three-year dispute with his neighbours has been barred from using a barbecue or any other fire-producing device on his property after repeated complaints about smoke.A Superior Court of Justice judge in Sault Ste. Marie issued an injunction in May 2023 prohibiting the man from burning firewood or “any other substances or materials” on or around his property. The order was made “absolute and without exception” after concerns that the defendant might circumvent its restrictions.
Court issues strict backyard fire ban
The case initially focused on smoke from the man's backyard. In June 2023, his lawyer asked whether the injunction could be changed to allow him to use his barbecue.The plaintiffs opposed the request but told the court that the order was not intended to prevent normal use of a natural gas barbecue.The court later found that the man used the barbecue in ways that went beyond cooking.On two occasions in July 2023, he cooked dinner and then left the barbecue burning and producing smoke for about 90 minutes without attending to it or preparing any food, according to the judgment, as cited by CTV News.
The smoke affected the neighbours' ability to enjoy their property without exposure to smoke, the judge said.In September that year, the man also lit a propane-fuelled fire in his backyard without an apparent cooking purpose.
Barbecue use leads to further complaints
The neighbours later opposed another request to allow barbecue use, saying they had “no confidence your client will not use his barbecue to create a nuisance.”In November, the man's lawyer asked the court to permit barbecue use solely for cooking and eating.
The request was not approved.The dispute over the wording of the injunction continued. In February 2024, the man wrote to the plaintiffs' lawyer saying he intended to use his barbecue and other appliances powered by liquid petroleum gas.He argued that the injunction did not cover liquid petroleum gas because he considered it a mixture rather than a “substance”.The man began representing himself later that month.
Smoke-producing machinery
The complaints later extended beyond the barbecue.In April 2024, the man started a piece of machinery on his patio six times during one day. The equipment released a large amount of smoke, according to the court decision.The activity was frequent enough that another neighbour submitted an affidavit raising concerns about the smoke.In May 2024, the man was accused of revving a vehicle engine for about two hours while releasing a large amount of smoke.The plaintiffs' lawyer then asked the court to find the man in contempt.The judge concluded that the man understood the injunction, even though he disagreed with it.The court considered the prolonged barbecue use, propane fire, smoke-producing machinery and vehicle engine to be conduct that violated the purpose of the order.“I can think of no reason the defendant did this except to intentionally disrupt the enjoyment of the plaintiffs,” the judge wrote.
“The defendant used his barbecue as a weapon of nuisance, in direct violation of the injunctive order.”
Judge declines contempt finding
The judge found there were grounds for contempt but decided not to make a contempt finding.The decision noted that the man had complied with the injunction for more than two years after learning that he could face contempt proceedings for violating it.The judge said that continued compliance was expected and warned the man against trying to interpret the order in a way that would undermine its purpose.“It is the expectation of this court that the defendant will continue to comply with the injunction order and not resort back to playing games and interpreting the injunction order in ways that suit his intention to disrupt the enjoyment of the plaintiffs,” the judge said.The injunction remains in force, leaving the man prohibited from burning materials or using fire-producing devices in the manner covered by the order.
