Who is David L. Lanthier?

David L. Lanthier is a vice-chair at the Ontario Land Tribunal with 108 decisions on record from 2021 to 2023. Key areas include other tribunals, administrative law, real estate law.

What tribunal does David L. Lanthier sit on?

David L. Lanthier sits on the Ontario Land Tribunal.

What areas of law does David L. Lanthier decide?

David L. Lanthier's most common areas include Other Tribunals (98 decisions), Administrative Law (74 decisions), Real Estate Law (36 decisions). David L. Lanthier has handled 108 decisions across 9 areas.

How many decisions has David L. Lanthier made?

David L. Lanthier has 108 decisions on record from 2021 to 2023.

Who frequently appears before David L. Lanthier?

Representatives who frequently appear before David L. Lanthier include Michael Foderick, David Donnelly, David White.

David L. Lanthier — Vice-Chair

Nemeth v. Toronto (City), 2023 CanLII 64038

Tribunal awards $4.3 million for expropriated land, finding highest and best use was mid-rise development.

The Claimant sought compensation for the expropriation of her property by the City of Toronto.

The City expropriated the land to build a new childcare centre after selling its previous childcare site to Metrolinx for the Eglinton LRT project.

The Tribunal determined that the 'scheme' to be ignored for valuation purposes was the childcare centre, not the Eglinton LRT.

Finding the highest and best use to be an 8-storey mixed-use mid-rise development, the Tribunal awarded market value compensation of $4,326,350 based on a rate of $70 per square foot buildable.

A claim for disturbance damages was dismissed.

OLTJul 10, 2023

Cheevers v. Brantford (City), 2023 CanLII 61506

Appeal of zoning by-law amendment dismissed without a hearing for failing to disclose genuine planning grounds.

The applicant brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's appeal of a zoning by-law amendment without a hearing under s. 34(25) of the Planning Act.

The appellant, a neighbouring resident, raised concerns regarding environmental contamination, heritage impacts, shadowing, and traffic, but failed to provide expert evidence or identify specific land use planning grounds.

The Tribunal found that the appellant's concerns were based on personal apprehensions and historical applications, and did not constitute genuine, legitimate, and authentic planning reasons.

The motion was granted and the appeal was dismissed.

OLTJul 6, 2023

Niagara Home Builders' Association v. Thorold (City), 2023 CanLII 58635

Road projects serving broader community function are DC eligible and not local services.

The Niagara Home Builders' Association appealed the City of Thorold's Development Charges By-law No. 46-2019, challenging the inclusion of four road projects (portions of Barker Parkway and Upper's Lane, and related intersection improvements).

The appellant argued these were 'local services' and thus ineligible for development charges funding.

The Tribunal found that the City's Local Service Policy takes precedence in determining DC eligibility.

Based on their function, Barker Parkway and Upper's Lane were classified as Arterial Roads serving a broader community function, not just the specific subdivision.

Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that the road projects and intersection improvements were properly included as DC eligible growth-related services.

The appeal was dismissed.

OLTJun 30, 2023

Beecroft v. Douro-Dummer (Township), 2023 CanLII 56703

Costs motion dismissed; withdrawing an appeal before a hearing does not inherently constitute unreasonable conduct.

The applicant sought costs against the appellant after the appellant withdrew his appeal of a zoning by-law amendment shortly before the scheduled hearing.

The Tribunal found it had jurisdiction to consider the costs request despite the withdrawal and granted the applicant party status for the motion.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the motion for costs, finding that the appellant's conduct in filing the appeal, inquiring about purchasing the property, and ultimately withdrawing the appeal in response to a communication from the applicant's counsel was reasonable and did not meet the high threshold of unreasonable, frivolous, vexatious, or bad faith conduct required for a costs award.

OLTJun 20, 2023

Eleonora Lalli v. City of Hamilton, 2023 CanLII 56707

Appeal of consent condition dismissed without a hearing for failing to disclose apparent land use planning grounds.

The appellant appealed a condition of provisional consent requiring a cash payment for future road urbanization.

The City brought a motion to dismiss the appeal without a hearing under s. 53(31) of the Planning Act, arguing the notice of appeal failed to disclose any apparent land use planning grounds.

The appellant sought to introduce new grounds related to the City's financial policies and use of the collected funds.

The Tribunal held that the appellant was restricted to the grounds in the original notice of appeal, which only raised procedural fairness issues regarding the Committee of Adjustment's process.

The Tribunal found these were not valid planning grounds and dismissed the appeal.

The Tribunal further held that even if the new grounds were considered, they constituted an impermissible challenge to a Council-approved financial policy rather than the condition itself, and thus also failed to disclose valid planning grounds.

OLTJun 20, 2023

Abbotts v. Blue Mountains (Town), 2023 CanLII 56712

Costs motion against residents group dismissed; participation in planning appeal was reasonable and in good faith.

The applicant sought costs of $153,858.95 against a residents group following a settlement hearing for a subdivision development.

The applicant argued the residents group acted unreasonably by pursuing meritless planning arguments and failing to call engineering evidence.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding the residents group participated reasonably, complied with procedural orders, and advocated in good faith.

The Tribunal emphasized its cautious approach to costs against citizens to avoid a chilling effect on public participation in the planning process.

OLTJun 20, 2023

Two Sisters Resorts Corp. v. Niagara-on-the-Lake (Town), 2023 CanLII 56716

Motions for costs dismissed; late withdrawal of heritage objections did not constitute unreasonable or vexatious misconduct.

The Town and an intervenor association brought motions for costs against the owners after the owners withdrew their objections to notices of intention to designate heritage attributes under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The withdrawal occurred five weeks before the scheduled hearing.

The Tribunal first determined it had jurisdiction to award costs in a proceeding even if the matter was withdrawn before a hearing on the merits.

However, applying the high threshold for costs under Rule 23.9, the Tribunal found that the owners' conduct in withdrawing the objections and their stated reasons for doing so were not clearly unreasonable, frivolous, vexatious, or in bad faith.

The motions for costs were dismissed.

OLTJun 19, 2023

Two Sisters Resorts Corp. v. Niagara-on-the-Lake (Town), 2023 CanLII 56708

Motions for costs dismissed; late withdrawal of heritage objections did not constitute unreasonable conduct.

The Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake and the Save Our Rand Estate Association brought motions for costs against the Owners after the Owners withdrew their objections to Notices of Intention to Designate under the Ontario Heritage Act shortly before the scheduled hearing.

The moving parties argued the late withdrawal and the Owners' conduct throughout the proceeding were unreasonable and an abuse of process.

The Tribunal found that while it has jurisdiction to award costs even when a matter is withdrawn prior to a hearing, the Owners' conduct did not meet the high threshold of being clearly unreasonable, frivolous, vexatious, or in bad faith.

The motions for costs were dismissed.

OLTJun 19, 2023

Our Milton – Miltonians for Sensible Development Ltd. v. Milton (Town), 2023 CanLII 53884

Tribunal approves settlement for mixed-use development, amending zoning by-law and confirming official plan amendment.

The appellant appealed the Town of Milton's adoption of an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment that permitted a mixed-use development.

The parties reached a settlement and presented revised instruments to the Tribunal.

Based on uncontroverted expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the revised development consistent with provincial policies and local official plans.

The Tribunal allowed the zoning appeal in part to implement the settlement and confirmed the withdrawal of the official plan appeal, bringing it into effect.

OLTJun 12, 2023

Parkside Hills Inc. v. Hamilton (City), 2023 CanLII 46259

Tribunal lacks jurisdiction under Expropriations Act to determine land value absent formal expropriation or explicit consent.

The claimant sought $5.6 million in compensation under the Expropriations Act for the market value of lands to be transferred to the City for a stormwater management pond pursuant to a subdivision agreement.

The City brought a motion to dismiss the claim for lack of jurisdiction.

The Tribunal granted the motion, finding that no formal expropriation had occurred to trigger section 26 of the Act, and the parties had not explicitly consented to arbitration under section 30.

The claim was dismissed, with directives provided for the claimant to potentially amend its pleadings or pursue alternative remedies.

OLTMay 25, 2023

Lafarge Canada Inc. v. Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry (Ministry), 2023 CanLII 43666

Tribunal ordered two aggregate licence transfer proceedings to be heard by a common panel.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a concurrent Case Management Conference for two separate proceedings concerning the transfer of aggregate licences under the Aggregate Resources Act.

The Tribunal determined that, due to common jurisdictional and legal issues regarding financial compensation for licence transfers, both proceedings should be heard by a common panel to avoid inconsistent findings.

The Tribunal issued procedural orders and scheduled the hearings for November 2023 and February 2024.

OLTMay 17, 2023

Hollis Dev LP v. Toronto (City.), 2023 CanLII 43689

Tribunal schedules settlement hearing and grants Metrolinx party status despite parties' non-compliance with directives.

At a case management conference, the Tribunal addressed the parties' failure to comply with a prior order to submit a Procedural Order and Issues List.

The parties had reached a last-minute settlement and requested a settlement hearing.

The Tribunal scheduled a one-day settlement hearing, granted Metrolinx party status on consent, and admonished the parties for their non-compliance with case management directives.

OLTMay 17, 2023

Linelle Development Limited v. Toronto (City), 2023 CanLII 39108

Draft Plan of Subdivision approved subject to conditions following settlement between developer and municipality.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit a residential development.

Following a settlement on the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments, the parties presented a settlement regarding the Draft Plan of Subdivision.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed Draft Plan and conditions consistent with provincial policies and good planning.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Draft Plan subject to conditions.

OLTMay 3, 2023

4135199 Canada Inc. et al. v. Town of Erin, 2023 CanLII 36267

Tribunal issues Procedural Order and schedules further CMC and hearing dates for remaining subdivision appeals.

The Tribunal convened a Case Management Conference to facilitate continued case management of outstanding appeals relating to approximately eight hectares of lands identified as 'Deferral Areas'.

The parties proposed scheduling a further CMC in the early fall and setting hearing dates to ensure the appeals move forward without delay.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order and scheduled a further CMC for September 27, 2023, and a nine-day video hearing commencing March 18, 2024.

OLTApr 26, 2023

1353837 Ontario Incorporated v. Stratford (City), 2023 CanLII 36273

Tribunal orders concurrent, non-bifurcated hearing for competing costs motions in expropriation matter.

At a Case Management Conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal determined the procedural schedule and format for two upcoming motions for costs following an expropriation compensation decision.

The Tribunal declined to order mandatory mediation, rejected the claimant's request to bifurcate the hearing into separate entitlement and quantum phases, and directed that both motions be heard concurrently over a five-day period, with the claimant presenting its motion first.

OLTApr 25, 2023

Oakville Developments (2010) Inc. v. Metrolinx, 2023 CanLII 30828

Expropriation claims by owner and tenant consolidated and scheduled for phased hearing.

A case management conference was held regarding two expropriation claims against Metrolinx by a property owner and its tenant.

The Tribunal ordered the consolidation of the two proceedings on consent.

The Tribunal rejected Metrolinx's request to delay the hearing pending the outcome of unrelated planning appeals, finding no justifiable basis for delay.

A 13-day first phase hearing was scheduled for February 2024 to determine market value and injurious affection, with a second phase deferred to address disturbance damages and further injurious affection once the infrastructure work is completed.

OLTApr 11, 2023

White v. Ministry of Transportation (Ontario), 2023 CanLII 28246

Tribunal issues procedural order and schedules hearing dates for expropriation compensation claim.

OLTApr 6, 2023

Scherer Holdings Ltd. et al v. Waterloo (Regional Municipality), 2023 CanLII 28248

Tribunal issues procedural directions at first case management conference for expropriation compensation claim.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation arising from the expropriation of the claimant's lands for a Light Rail Transit System.

As the parties were not yet ready for case management and intended to discuss potential resolution, the Tribunal issued directives for future scheduling, status reporting, and the eventual submission of a draft Procedural Order.

OLTApr 6, 2023

1289777 Ontario Limited v. Metrolinx, 2023 CanLII 28243

Tribunal administratively consolidates two related expropriation claims and issues procedural orders for a joint hearing.

The claimant brought two claims for land compensation under the Expropriations Act relating to adjacent properties expropriated by Metrolinx.

At a case management conference, the Ontario Land Tribunal ordered that the two proceedings be administratively consolidated and heard together, given the overlap in parties, issues, and evidence.

The Tribunal issued procedural orders setting out the pre-hearing steps and scheduled a 14-day hearing on the merits for early 2024.

OLTApr 6, 2023

Dunpar Developments Inc. et al v Toronto (City), 2023 CanLII 28240

Tribunal schedules second Case Management Conference for appeals of Toronto's development charge by-law.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding five appeals of the City of Toronto's Development Charge By-law 1137-2022.

The parties advised they were in ongoing discussions and expected to finalize a Procedural Order and Issues List by late June.

The Tribunal scheduled a further video Case Management Conference for June 26, 2023, and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order, an estimated hearing length, and availability dates by June 19, 2023.

OLTApr 5, 2023

Nemeth v. Toronto (City), 2023 CanLII 64038

Cheevers v. Brantford (City), 2023 CanLII 61506

Niagara Home Builders' Association v. Thorold (City), 2023 CanLII 58635

Beecroft v. Douro-Dummer (Township), 2023 CanLII 56703

Eleonora Lalli v. City of Hamilton, 2023 CanLII 56707

Abbotts v. Blue Mountains (Town), 2023 CanLII 56712

Two Sisters Resorts Corp. v. Niagara-on-the-Lake (Town), 2023 CanLII 56716

Two Sisters Resorts Corp. v. Niagara-on-the-Lake (Town), 2023 CanLII 56708

Our Milton – Miltonians for Sensible Development Ltd. v. Milton (Town), 2023 CanLII 53884

Parkside Hills Inc. v. Hamilton (City), 2023 CanLII 46259

Lafarge Canada Inc. v. Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry (Ministry), 2023 CanLII 43666

Hollis Dev LP v. Toronto (City.), 2023 CanLII 43689

Linelle Development Limited v. Toronto (City), 2023 CanLII 39108

4135199 Canada Inc. et al. v. Town of Erin, 2023 CanLII 36267

1353837 Ontario Incorporated v. Stratford (City), 2023 CanLII 36273

Oakville Developments (2010) Inc. v. Metrolinx, 2023 CanLII 30828

White v. Ministry of Transportation (Ontario), 2023 CanLII 28246

Scherer Holdings Ltd. et al v. Waterloo (Regional Municipality), 2023 CanLII 28248

1289777 Ontario Limited v. Metrolinx, 2023 CanLII 28243

Dunpar Developments Inc. et al v Toronto (City), 2023 CanLII 28240

for 1289777 Ontario Limited

for 1386146 Ontario Inc.

for 1605914 Ontario Inc.

for 1887409 Ontario Limited

for 1968223 Ontario Limited

for 221 Sterling Road Holdings Inc.

for 2470347 Ontario Inc., RioCan Holdings Inc., 2075936 Ontario Ltd., 2076031 Ontario Limited, Junction Road Nominee Inc., St. Clair Caledonia Partnership, 2501882 Ontario Limited, Talus (Bathurst) Limited, and Dun West Properties Ltd.

for 2520650 Ontario Inc.

for 2530507 Ontario Inc.

for 567485 Ontario Ltd. and 887343 Ontario Ltd.

for 783878 Ontario Ltd. o/a Bucci Homes

for Association of Consulting Engineering Companies – Ontario and Ontario Society of Professional Engineers

for Bell Telephone Company of Canada

for Calloway REIT

for Canadian National Railway Company

for Cartwave Realty Limited and Cornwall Gravel Company Limited

for Cartwave Realty Limited, Cornwall Gravel Company Limited

for Catherine and Don Acchione

for City of Toronto

for Cityscape Holdings Inc., Dream Distillery District Commercial (GP) Inc., Ribbon East Corp., Ribbon West Corp., OTP Management Ltd., Entuitive Corp., Johnson Sustronk Weinstein & Associates, Arup Canada Inc., Hatch Ltd., and WDL 20 GP Inc.

for CLOCA

for ClubLink Corporation ULC and ClubLink Holdings Ltd.

for Coco Properties Corporation

for CP REIT Ontario Properties Limited

for Craft Kingsmen Rail Corp., CKF Rail Development Limited Partnership, DK Victoria Park Inc., Fengate CCC Holdings LP, G. Gagliano Properties Ltd. and Benton Properties Corp.

for CRH Canada Group Inc.

for David Springer Estate

for D.D. Acquisitions Partnership

for Delta

for Dream Unlimited and Great Gulf

for Dunpar Developments Inc.

for Estelle Kosoy

for Glen Douglas Gordon and Rolling Meadows Development Corporation

for himself

for Institut Islamique Al-Rasheed

for Jacob William Hoogenboom

for Jeanor Enterprises Inc.

for Jeanor Enterprises Inc. (Applicant)

for Joanne Grysak and Blair Grysak

for Lafarge Canada Inc.

for Lafarge Canada Inc. (Appellant Licensee)

for Lamb Sterling Corp.

for Lanterra Management Ltd., Laurier Paradise CC 347-357 Kennedy Inc. and Laurier Paradise CC 375 Kennedy Inc.

for Linelle Development Limited

for Marilyn McMahon (Ayerst)

for Maurice Laframboise

for Metrolinx

for Michael Lanctot

for Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

for Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry

for Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry (Ministry)

for MOD Developments (Redpath) Limited Partnership

for Niagara Escarpment Commission

for Norfolk County

for North Edge Properties Ltd.

for Oakville Developments (2010) Inc.

for Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association

for OTT 33 Development Inc.

for Parc Downsview Park / Canada Lands Corporation

for Parkside Hills Inc.