A Mississauga man took the city to court over not mowing his lawn — and won

A Mississauga man has won a Superior Court challenge against the city over a weed control bylaw that prevents homeowners from growing some plants and grass over a certain height.

Wolf Ruck, who owns the lawn that sparked the legal proceedings, told CBC Radio’s Metro Morning on Friday that his top priority is protecting nature. 

“I felt that this is something that I could do personally, in order to address the problem of biodiversity decline and global warming,” he said.

On Tuesday, Ruck won a self-represented case against the City of Mississauga, challenging part of a weed control bylaw that prohibits growing grass over 20 centimetres and growing certain plants. Ruck was seeking $2.46 million in damages and other relief, but he was not awarded any money, according the ruling.

But parts of the bylaw violate Ruck’s right to freedom of expression, Justice M.T. Doi wrote in the decision.

“In this case, I find that the impact of the By-law’s tall grass and nuisance weed provisions on the right to freedom of expression is relatively serious,” the decision said. 

The City of Mississauga is still reviewing the decision and considering next steps, Irene McCutcheon, a city spokesperson told CBC News in an email Thursday.

City received ‘multiple complaints’

Ruck has lived in the community of Orchard Heights since the 1970s, but he stopped mowing his lawn in 2021, leading to the years-long dispute.

According to the ruling, the City of Mississauga received its first complaint about Ruck’s tall grass in August 2021. After that, there were “multiple complaints” in June and July 2022 and an additional complaint in May 2023.

The bylaw enforcement process is triggered following complaints investigated by municipal law enforcement officers, the ruling said. After the May 2023 complaint, the city issued a notice of contravention.  

“To enforce the By-law, the City arranged to cut his grass that exceeded the allowable height, removed nuisance weeds from his property, and added the costs of this work to his property tax bill.,” the ruling said.

Ruck says that after some time of leaving parts of his lawn uncut, weeds were growing from seeds that had blown in from the wind, in line with his goal of encouraging biodiversity and pollination. 

“The lawn basically consists of islands that are surrounded by a pathway that is regularly mowed,” Ruck said. “So it’s not as if the entire property was just left to grow wild.”

The city cited a city report as part of its argument, noting the bylaw “contributes to a healthy and safe environment for occupants within the City.” It added that it conducted a jurisdictional review of what bylaws other municipalities that have enacted to regulate tall grass and nuisance weeds.

However, Doi’s ruling said, “No evidence was led to show how a maximum grass height of 20 cm or the removal of enumerated nuisance weeds and seeds would impact public health or safety and ecological diversity in urban settings where the By-law applied.”

The ruling added “it is not sufficient for [a municipality] to say, ‘we are doing what everyone else is doing’ [as the municipality] must present evidence of a search for a minimally impairing solution.”

Ruck says it’s a “sad outcome” that his relationship with neighbours has deteriorated, but he hopes the Justice’s decision of protecting freedom of expression will set a precedent. 

Mississauga’s evidence fell short, lawyer said

John Mather, a lawyer representing the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a charity that intervened in the case, said as it stands, Mississauga’s bylaw is no longer enforceable. 

“Basically what the court has said to Mississauga is, if you are going to limit how people can use their lawns, you need to do it with evidence,” he told Radio-Canada on Friday. 

“You have to go through the exercise, as a government, to figure out what is actually the threat here, what is actually the risk? What is the thing we need to stop?”

That could include addressing concerns like fire risk, invasive species and aesthetics blight while balancing someone’s freedom of expression rights, Mather said.

“I think any municipality that has any weed control bylaw will … need to look at Justice Doi’s decision,” he said.