Article content continued

Neither the mayor nor his lawyer responded to messages requesting comment Friday.

Last November, Judge Hackland declared the mayor’s seat vacant after finding he violated conflict-of-interest legislation by participating in a debate and vote on an order requesting that he reimburse $3,150 in donations to his private football foundation. The integrity commissioner found Mr. Ford improperly used city resources to solicit funds, and at an August 2010 meeting, council accepted her recommended sanction, ordering the mayor to repay lobbyists’ donations. Mr. Ford did not comply, and during a follow-up council debate in February 2012, he successfully argued it was unfair for him to repay the $3,150 out of his “own pocket.”

In overturning Judge Hackland’s ruling, the divisional court found council’s initial resolution requiring Mr. Ford to repay the funds was ultra vires, or outside council’s authority, and that all subsequent related proceedings were therefore null and void.

Mr. Magder’s factum says the divisional court erred by misapplying the doctrine of ultra vires, by failing to recognize that Mr. Ford was challenging council’s 2010 order in the wrong forum and by improperly granting a retroactive remedy.

On the ultra vires issue, Mr. Ruby says Canadian courts have increasingly moved toward “a more deferential, generous and flexible approach” to municipal powers.

The MCIA does not take a holiday merely because council makes an ultra vires decision

He further argues that had Mr. Ford wanted to protest the enforceability of council’s repayment order, he ought to have challenged it at the time, rather than in a separate proceeding years later.