The words “owned” and “owner” have been the subject of judicial review and have differing meanings in the face of the particular purpose of the law applying in each case. A tenant, as the person in the possession of premises, was held to come within the word “owner” in order to allow a health by-law and plumbing inspector’s order to apply effectively. Zed v. Fullerton, (1940) 1944 CanLII 576 (NB QB), 17 M.P.R. 417 (N.B.S.C., June 15, 1944). The court held that “owner” at common law was an indefinite expression and “may mean anyone who has an interest” (p.419).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.