Anita Lovrich

The appellant property owner appealed the 2023 and 2024 property tax assessments for a multi-tenanted retail plaza and gas station in Thorold, Ontario.

The Assessment Review Board determined the current value of the property by applying the income approach to the retail and office portions and the cost approach to the gas bar improvements and excess land.

The Board rejected the appellant's reliance on actual rents, preferring the respondent's market rent evidence, and declined to consider a vacancy rate issue raised for the first time at the hearing.

The Board ultimately increased the assessed value of the property from $1,858,000 to $2,385,000.

The appellant appealed the 2024 property assessment for a residential property in Burlington, arguing the current value should be $542,300 rather than the assessed value.

MPAC argued the highest and best use was mixed-use multi-residential development land due to a 2023 zoning approval, and proposed a value of $933,000.

The Assessment Review Board rejected MPAC's "state and condition" approach, finding that the property must be valued based on its legally permissible use as of the January 1, 2016 valuation day.

The Board determined the highest and best use was improved residential and relied on a comparable sale provided by the appellant to determine a current value of $554,940.

The Board found no equitable adjustment was required and reduced the assessment to $554,000.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of 59 Glen Street for the 2023 and 2024 taxation years, arguing the current value was incorrect and raising a boundary dispute.

The Assessment Review Board found it lacked jurisdiction to determine boundary lines or land titles.

On the issue of current value, the Board rejected the appellant's proposed comparables as they lacked valid sales data.

Relying on the respondent's comparables but applying a 40% reduction for the subject property's inferior condition, the Board determined the current value to be $37,632.

The Board then applied a 10% equitable reduction based on an assessment-to-sales ratio analysis, resulting in a final assessed value of $34,000.

The City of Vaughan brought a motion to dismiss Canuck Properties Ltd.'s property assessment appeals for the 2022-2024 taxation years on the grounds of issue estoppel and abuse of process.

The City argued that the same issues had been decided in a prior appeal proceeding for the 2017-2020 taxation years, which was settled by the tenant without Canuck's active participation.

The Assessment Review Board found that while the strict requirements for issue estoppel were met, it would be a real injustice to apply the doctrine because Canuck was never served with a Statement of Issues in the prior proceeding, constituting an incurable procedural deficiency.

The Board also declined to dismiss the appeals for abuse of process, finding that preventing relitigation would condone a breach of procedural fairness.

The motion was dismissed.

The appellant appealed the supplementary and annual property assessments for a newly built seasonal dwelling.

The Assessment Review Board reduced the current value of the property from $581,000 to $498,000 based on comparable sales, particularly a nearby property with similar beach access.

The Board also changed the effective date of the supplementary assessment from March 2, 2023, to June 20, 2024, based on the appellant's evidence of when the property was first used.

No equitable adjustment was made.

The applicant applied to the municipality for a reduction, cancellation, or refund of 2023 property taxes due to sickness or extreme poverty under s. 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act.

The municipality delegated its authority to the Assessment Review Board.

At a pre-hearing conference, the Board noted the application appeared to have been filed after the statutory deadline of the last day of February 2024.

The Board issued an interim order requiring the municipality to provide the exact filing date and submissions on whether the Board has jurisdiction to extend the deadline, with an opportunity for the applicant to respond.

The appellants appealed the property tax assessment of their residential property for the 2023 and 2024 taxation years, seeking a reduction from $225,000 to $199,000.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) proposed a reduction to $218,000 based on time-adjusted comparable sales.

The Assessment Review Board accepted MPAC's comparable properties and Assessment to Sales Ratio analysis, finding the current value to be $218,000 and concluding that no equitable adjustment was required.

The appellant property owner applied for a property tax refund under s. 357(1)(g) of the Municipal Act, 2001, arguing that renovations commenced in 2022 prevented the normal use of the land.

The City of Barrie denied the application on the basis that the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) had already reduced the property's assessed value in 2019 to account for the vacancy and anticipated renovations following the departure of an anchor tenant.

The Assessment Review Board dismissed the appeal, finding that s. 357(1)(g) is intended to address only mid-year changes that a taxpayer cannot address in an appeal of the assessed value.

Because the 2022 renovations were anticipated and accounted for in the 2019 valuation adjustment, they did not constitute a mid-year change warranting further tax relief.

The appellants appealed the property assessment of their vacant commercial land for the 2022, 2023, and 2024 taxation years.

The appellants sought a reduction in the current value assessment to $34,890, while the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation requested it be confirmed at $48,000.

The Assessment Review Board found that the appellants' proposed comparable property sale from 2017 was the best evidence of value.

The Board reduced the assessment to $35,000 and declined to consider the issue of property classification as it was raised too late and would prejudice the respondents.

The appellant applied for a property tax refund under s. 357(1)(g) of the Municipal Act, 2001, arguing that renovations prevented the normal use of the fourth floor of its office building for all of 2022.

The municipality granted a partial refund.

On appeal, the Assessment Review Board found that renovations prevented normal use from January 1 to December 15, 2022.

The Board calculated the eligible relief based on a 50% current value adjustment for the renovated area and ordered the municipality to issue a further refund of $113,088.15.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's property assessment appeals for the 2022-2024 taxation years based on issue estoppel.

The appellant had previously appealed the 2017 assessment, which was resolved by Minutes of Settlement establishing the property's value.

The Assessment Review Board found that the three requirements for issue estoppel were met: the same question regarding current value was decided, the prior decision was final, and the parties were identical.

Finding no injustice in applying the doctrine, the Board granted the motion and dismissed the appeals.

The appellant property manager brought a motion for issue estoppel, seeking to prevent the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) from reassessing the subject property's current value contrary to a 2020 settlement agreement.

MPAC argued that improvements to the property justified a supplementary assessment.

The Assessment Review Board declined to adjudicate the estoppel motion at the interim stage due to evidentiary ambiguities regarding the improvements and the relationship between the parties.

The Board directed that the estoppel issues be addressed at the main hearing.

The appellants appealed the property assessment of their residential property for the 2023 and 2024 taxation years.

The Assessment Review Board determined the current value of the property as of the January 1, 2016 valuation day by analyzing comparable sales provided by both parties.

The Board reduced the assessment to $318,000 for both taxation years but found no evidence to support a further reduction for equity with similar lands in the vicinity.

The City of Mississauga appealed the property assessment of an industrial mall, arguing that the classification of two specific units should be changed to the Industrial class.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the appeals on the basis of issue estoppel or abuse of process, arguing that the property's classification was already determined in a prior 2017 appeal proceeding resolved on consent.

The Assessment Review Board dismissed the motion, finding that the classification of the two specific units was not raised or necessarily determined in the prior proceeding, and therefore the requirements for issue estoppel were not met.

The Board also found no evidence that the current appeal constituted an abuse of process.

The appellant appealed the 2023 omitted assessment and the deemed 2024 assessment of a newly constructed single detached dwelling in Mississauga.

The appellant argued the assessment was too high because modern construction methods and materials were used, suggesting a lower value than traditionally built homes.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) amended its opinion of current value to $2,202,000 prior to the hearing.

The Assessment Review Board rejected the appellant's proposed comparable properties as they lacked market-tested sales evidence near the valuation day and were substantially older and smaller.

The Board accepted MPAC's comparable sales and assessment-to-sales ratio analysis, finding no equitable adjustment was required.

The Board ordered the assessment reduced to $2,202,000 for the 2024 taxation year and the omitted assessment reduced to $1,459,000, reflecting MPAC's amended valuation.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of an industrial warehouse used for car rental operations for the 2022, 2023, and 2024 taxation years.

The appellant argued the building had no value and the property should be assessed as vacant land.

The Assessment Review Board rejected the appellant's argument, preferring MPAC's cost approach valuation.

The Board determined the current value of the property and applied a 7% equity reduction, resulting in an increased assessment value compared to the returned assessment, but lower than MPAC's requested value.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's property assessment appeals for the 2023 and 2024 taxation years on the basis of issue estoppel.

The appellant argued that the current value of the subject property was inequitable compared to similar lands.

The Assessment Review Board found that the issue of equitable adjustment had already been finally determined in a prior appeal proceeding for the 2017-2020 taxation years.

Applying recent Divisional Court jurisprudence, the Board held that all requirements for issue estoppel were met and declined to exercise its discretion to hear the appeals.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

The appellant, Avondale Stores Limited, brought a motion for disclosure of various documents and data from the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) relating to the subject property and several comparable properties.

The Assessment Review Board partially granted the motion, ordering MPAC to disclose unredacted portions of its expert report and statement of response, specific rent rolls, and sales investigation sheets for properties relied upon by MPAC.

The Board denied requests for financial statements, generalized land attribute data, inspection notes, and building permits, finding them either irrelevant or disproportionate to the issues in dispute.

The appellant appealed the property assessments for the 2021 to 2024 taxation years.

The Assessment Review Board determined the current value of the property as of the January 1, 2016 valuation day using the direct comparison approach, relying on the respondent's comparable sales evidence.

The Board found the current value to be $992,000.

Applying an assessment to sales ratio of 0.98, the Board ordered an equitable reduction, resulting in a final assessment of $972,000 for the 2024 taxation year and $653,000 for the 2021 to 2023 taxation years.

The appellant appealed the returned assessment of $384,000 for a condominium apartment for the 2023 and 2024 taxation years, arguing for a reduction to $333,000.

The Assessment Review Board found the best evidence of current value was the time-adjusted sale price of the subject property, establishing a current value of $434,000.

Applying an assessment-to-sale ratio of 0.90 based on the respondent's equity analysis, the Board reduced the current value to $390,000 to ensure equity with similar lands in the vicinity.

The Board ordered the assessment increased to $390,000.