Ontario court rules naturalized gardens are a free expression right

A Mississauga man’s right to grow a naturalized garden has been upheld by an Ontario Superior Court, which struck down a city bylaw used to destroy his plants, ruling it violated his Charter rights.

Source: Adobe Stock

A Mississauga man’s right to grow a naturalized garden has been upheld by an Ontario Superior Court, which struck down a city bylaw used to destroy his plants, ruling it violated his Charter rights to freedom of expression.

The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) announced a victory for civil liberties in Ontario after the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled that the City of Mississauga violated resident Wolf Ruck’s freedom of expression rights. The court also found the city failed to show that its “nuisance weeds” bylaw was “demonstrably justified” in limiting those rights.

Justice M.T. Doi, who oversaw the case, stated that the Nuisance Weeds and Tall Grass Control By-law, used to mow Ruck’s naturalized garden, had a “relatively serious” impact on Ruck’s Charter rights. The city offered no evidence that it considered the bylaw’s impact on his freedom of expression.

The case began in 2021 when Ruck created a naturalized garden “to express his views on the importance of, among other things, biodiversity,” according to the statement. Ruck’s garden included pollinator plants, tall grasses, and untrimmed bushes, serving as a habitat for small animals and birds.

The city ordered Ruck to mow his garden after neighbours complained. When Ruck refused, the city hired contractors to destroy his garden, and the costs were added to his property tax.

Doi dismissed Ruck’s claim for damages but ruled that he was not responsible for paying the compliance costs added to his property tax.

The CCF intervened in Ruck’s case and celebrated the decision. John Mather of DMG Advocates represented the CCF, along with Lauren Baker of the same firm.

An statement released by the CCF on Wednesday noted that Mather and Baker were “thrilled for Ruck.”

“Ruck stood up for his constitutional rights. Even when the first judge ruled against him, he respectfully pursued his appeal rights and ultimately had the decision reversed in a significant decision not only for him, but all natural gardeners in Canada,” Mather said in the statement. “He is a self-represented litigant to be admired.”

Christine Van Geyn, the CCF’s Litigation Director, said the decision should serve as a reminder to municipal leaders that “they cannot disregard” the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

“Wolf’s garden is a wonderful expression of his views on beauty, about ecology, environmental protection, and climate change,” she said. “The City’s attempts to enter his property and destroy his beautiful naturalized garden were completely unnecessary,” Van Geyn said.. “The City has no business deciding what is or is not beautiful.”

Josh Dehaas, counsel for the CCF, noted his gratitude to Ruck “for his dedication to defending homeowners’ rights.”