Jack Young is a vice-chair at the Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal with 118 decisions on record from 2000 to 2013. Key areas include administrative law, other tribunals, environmental law.

What tribunal does Jack Young sit on?

Jack Young sits on the Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal.

What areas of law does Jack Young decide?

Jack Young's most common areas include Administrative Law (112 decisions), Other Tribunals (105 decisions), Environmental Law (50 decisions). Jack Young has handled 118 decisions across 4 areas.

How many decisions has Jack Young made?

Jack Young has 118 decisions on record from 2000 to 2013.

Who frequently appears before Jack Young?

Representatives who frequently appear before Jack Young include Keith Armstrong, Joanne Cook, Belfa Thomas.

/Adjudicator

minicounsel

Jack Young — Vice-Chair

Jack Young

Vice-Chair·Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal·Since 2000

118

cases · 14 yrs · OAFRAAT

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Vice Chair· 79Vice-Chair· 31Vice Chair· 2Vice Chair· 2Vice chair· 1vice-président· 1Vice-Chair· 1Vice-Chairman· 1

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalMay 29, 2002

Engineer's report for municipal drain improvement referred back for redesign of route and reassessment of costs.

Several assessed landowners appealed the engineer's report for the Walker Drain Improvement under section 48 of the Drainage Act.

The appellants argued that the proposed route for the drain relocation was not optimal and that the assessment of costs was unfair.

The Tribunal ordered the engineer's report to be referred back to the engineer to redesign the drain along an alternative route proposed by the appellants' engineer, which more closely aligned with the existing drain and minimized property damage.

The Tribunal also ordered modifications to the assessment methodology, adjusting the allocation of statutory benefits between roads and residential lands.

K. Loucks et al. v. Municipality of Thames Centre, 2002 ONAFRAAT 20

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalMar 21, 2002

Tribunal adopts original engineer's report for municipal drain, rejecting revised location and modifying assessments.

Several landowners appealed the engineer's report and the Court of Revision's decision regarding the Smith Municipal Drain.

The appellants objected to the proposed location of the drain and the associated assessments.

The Tribunal found that the original engineer's report, which located the drain on the Béliveau and Lalonde properties, was the most economical and least disruptive option, rejecting a revised report that moved the drain to the Cusson property.

The Tribunal ordered the adoption of the original report with modifications, including the provision of a berm, a fence allowance for Cusson, and special benefit assessments to cover the extra engineering costs and the fence.

Smith Municipal Drain (Re), 2002 ONAFRAAT 12

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalMar 6, 2002

Tribunal ordered revisions to an Engineer's Report for a municipal drain following a settlement agreement.

The appellants appealed the Engineer's Report and the Court of Revision's decision regarding the Paradise Road Drain under the Drainage Act, seeking a change in the drain's location and increased compensation.

During the hearing, the appellants and the respondent municipality reached a settlement agreement.

The Tribunal ordered the Engineer's Report to be revised in accordance with the settlement, which relocated the drain, reduced the appellants' assessment to zero, and increased their right-of-way allowance.

Garry Steele and Marjorie Steele v. City of Kawartha Lakes, 2002 ONAFRAAT 11

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalFeb 28, 2002

Tribunal ordered municipal drain to follow natural Western route rather than more expensive Northern route.

The appellant appealed the engineer's report and the Court of Revision's decision regarding the proposed Klijn Municipal Drain.

The engineer had proposed a Northern route for a closed tile drain, which was more expensive but preferred by neighbouring landowners to avoid crossing their properties.

The appellant argued for a Western route following the natural flow of water or an open ditch.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, finding that the Western route was cheaper, followed the natural water flow, and would service the entire watershed.

The Tribunal directed the municipality to refer the report back to the engineer to design the drain along the Western route and give downstream owners the option of an open or closed drain.

Klijn Municipal Drain (Re), 2002 ONAFRAAT 9

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalFeb 14, 2002

Tribunal orders municipality to appoint engineer for preliminary drainage report at appellants' sole expense.

The appellants appealed a municipal council's decision to deny their petition for drainage works under the Drainage Act.

The appellants argued that their lands required better drainage and requested the appointment of an engineer to assess the municipal drain's capacity.

The municipality and other assessed landowners opposed the petition, arguing the drain was recently cleaned and functioning properly.

The Tribunal found the petition invalid under Section 4 but, noting the appellants' offer to fund a preliminary report, ordered the municipality to appoint an engineer to prepare a preliminary report at the appellants' sole expense.

Lois M. Hayter and W. Glenn Hayter v. Municipality of Bluewater, 2002 ONAFRAAT 6

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalFeb 6, 2002

Tribunal grants municipality permission to procure an engineer's report to vary a drainage assessment.

The Corporation of the Township of North Huron applied to the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal for permission to procure an engineer's report under Section 76 of the Drainage Act to vary the assessment on the Whitfield Municipal Drain.

The Tribunal granted the application, noting that the neighboring Municipality of Morris-Turnberry did not object and that the engineer recommended a Section 76 report as the required work did not warrant the cost of a Section 78 report.

Whitfield Municipal Drain (Re), 2002 ONAFRAAT 5

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalNov 21, 2001

Municipality ordered to perform remedial grading and connect subsurface drains following drainage works appeal.

Landowners appealed the quality of construction of the Foreman Municipal Drain Improvement under section 64 of the Drainage Act.

The appellants raised concerns regarding tree removal, property grading, and the handling of subsurface drains.

The Tribunal found that the drain was generally constructed according to specifications and that tree removal was necessary.

However, the Tribunal ordered the Municipality to perform remedial grading on one property and to connect private subsurface drains to a newly constructed tile drain, awarding compensation to the landowner whose property was used for the new tile drain.

Foreman Municipal Drain Improvement (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 53

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalNov 2, 2001

Drainage works approved to meet environmental standards; benefit and outlet assessments adjusted for fairness.

The appellants appealed the engineer's report for the Middleton Street Drain 2001, arguing that existing natural drainage and dry wells were sufficient and that they should not be assessed for works designed to serve future developments.

The Tribunal found that the proposed storm water management system was necessary to comply with Ministry of Environment policies.

However, the Tribunal partially granted the appeals regarding the assessments, ordering adjustments to the benefit and outlet assessments for specific properties, including Coldstream Farms, to ensure a fairer distribution of costs.

Middleton Street Drain 2001 (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 51

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalOct 22, 2001

Tribunal reduced municipal drain assessment against County road, finding it disproportionate to the benefit received.

The County of Oxford appealed the assessments made against County Road 59 in the Engineer's Report for the Donaldson and Hallock Drains 2001.

The County argued that the assessments for benefit were disproportionate to the actual benefit received by the road.

The Tribunal found that the engineer's report did not sufficiently detail the method of assessments and that the amount assessed to the County for Branch A of the Donaldson Drain was excessive.

The Tribunal ordered a reduction in the County's assessment by $7,780 and redistributed this amount among the direct benefiting lots to allow the drainage works to proceed without delay.

Donaldson and Hallock Drains 2001 (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 49

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalOct 22, 2001

Drainage appeal dismissed and costs awarded against appellant who refused to participate after alleging bias.

The appellant appealed the Engineer's Report and the Court of Revision's decision regarding the repair and improvement of the Washington Municipal Drain.

The appellant raised concerns about assessments, allowances, cost-benefit justification, and environmental impacts, but refused to call evidence or submit to the Tribunal's jurisdiction, alleging bias and filing a mid-hearing appeal to the Drainage Referee.

The Tribunal dismissed the jurisdictional and bias challenges, proceeded with the hearing, and accepted the engineer's overwhelming evidence that the drainage works were necessary and the assessments fair.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the municipality due to his highly adversarial and unmeritorious approach.

Washington Drain (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 50

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalSep 24, 2001

Drainage works approved but assessments amended; engineer penalized for omitting assessment methodology from report.

Several landowners appealed the decision of the Court of Revision and the Engineer's Report regarding the Balls Drain 2000 in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim.

The appellants argued that the proposed drainage works were too costly, the drain was over-designed, and the assessments were unfair.

The Tribunal found that the construction of the drain was warranted and the design was appropriate.

However, the Tribunal amended some of the assessments, finding that a benefit assessment should be applied to the property obtaining a new legal outlet.

The Tribunal also penalized the engineer in costs for failing to include the methodology and rationale for the assessments in the report.

Balls Drain (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 44

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalSep 17, 2001

Application to adjourn hearing sine die pending appeals to the Referee dismissed.

The appellant requested an adjournment of the hearing sine die because he elected to file appeals from previous Tribunal decisions to the Referee, and intended to bring an application to the Referee for a declaration that the proposed drainage work does not comply with the Drainage Act.

The respondent and other represented parties opposed the request.

The Tribunal dismissed the application to adjourn, noting its obligation to deal with matters fairly and expeditiously in the absence of a valid order of prohibition.

Carl King v. City of Kawartha Lakes, 2001 ONAFRAAT 42

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalAug 17, 2001

Municipality ordered to pay $3,000 and rectify spoil banks for failing to consult on drain construction.

The appellants appealed the quality of construction of the Fekete Drain under section 64 of the Drainage Act, raising concerns about the drain's location, tree removal, topsoil stripping, and spoil bank depth.

The Tribunal found the Municipality failed to properly consult the appellants on the drain's location as previously ordered, awarding $3,000 in compensation.

The Tribunal also ordered the Municipality to level the spoil bank to the specified maximum depth of 0.6 metres and install swales to prevent water ponding, but dismissed claims regarding topsoil replacement and brush stacking.

M. and N. Sauro v. Municipality of Thames Centre, 2001 ONAFRAAT 40

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalJul 25, 2001

Engineer's Report for requisition drain amended to award injuring liability to appellant for increased water flow.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Court of Revision and an Engineer's Report regarding the construction of a requisition drain intended to provide an outlet for a new subdivision.

The appellant argued the drain would increase water flow onto his property without providing any benefit, and that the estimated costs were too low.

The Tribunal found that the appellant was entitled to an allowance for injuring liability due to the increased rate of water flow.

The Tribunal also determined that the benefit to the appellant's land was over-stated and adjusted the assessment, ordering the subdivision developer to pay the costs assessed to the subdivision lands.

The Tribunal accepted the engineer's cost estimate and confirmed the project qualified as a requisition drain under the Drainage Act.

Gauthier-Cusson Requisition Drain (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 36

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalJul 24, 2001

Le Tribunal modifie le rapport de l'ingénieur pour accorder une indemnité pour dommages et réviser la répartition des coûts du drain.

L'appelant a contesté le rapport de l'ingénieur concernant la construction d'un drain municipal destiné à desservir une nouvelle subdivision.

Le Tribunal a conclu que le drain proposé répondait à la définition de travaux exécutés sur demande, mais a modifié le rapport pour accorder à l'appelant une indemnité pour les dommages causés par l'augmentation de la vitesse d'écoulement de l'eau sur sa propriété.

Le Tribunal a également révisé la répartition des coûts, attribuant la majorité des avantages statutaires et des coûts à la subdivision plutôt qu'à l'appelant.

Dorilla Cusson c. Canton de Champlain, 2011 CanLII 101133

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalJul 20, 2001

Drainage works approved with minor adjustments to property assessments; appeals otherwise dismissed.

Several landowners appealed the Engineer's Report and the decision of the Court of Revision regarding the proposed Louks Drain in the Township of Norfolk.

The appellants argued that the drain was unnecessary, the route should be modified, and their assessments were too high.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence to halt the construction or alter the proposed route, noting the project was driven by the need to provide drainage to residential lots.

However, the Tribunal made minor adjustments to the statutory benefit and outlet liability assessments for specific properties to better reflect the actual benefits received.

The appeals under sections 48 and 54 of the Drainage Act were otherwise dismissed.

Louks Drain (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 35

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalJul 4, 2001

Tribunal permitted municipality to refer drainage report back to engineer to accommodate fish habitat modifications.

The Municipality of West Grey referred a matter to the Tribunal under section 51 of the Drainage Act regarding modifications required by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada to a proposed municipal drain.

The modifications, intended to compensate for fish habitat disruption, increased the project's cost by approximately 47%.

The Tribunal ordered that the municipality could refer the engineer's report back for modification and revise the assessment schedules, despite the authorizing by-law having already been passed.

Municipal Drain No. 21 (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 34

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalJul 3, 2001

Municipality ordered to appoint engineer after improperly refusing to proceed with drainage petition.

The appellant filed a petition for drainage works under the Drainage Act.

The municipality decided not to proceed with the petition, arguing it did not meet the criteria under Section 4 and that the existing drain was in good working condition.

The appellant appealed to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal found that the municipality acted improperly in refusing to act upon the petition, as a reasonable effort was made to describe the area needing drainage improvement.

The appeal was granted, and the municipality was ordered to appoint an engineer to proceed with the drainage works.

Carl Hillebrecht v. Township of West Perth, 2001 ONAFRAAT 33

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalJun 22, 2001

Drainage works modified to delete upper branch drain and allow landowners to opt out of stormwater pond.

Multiple landowners appealed the Final Engineer's Report regarding the Allanport Road Municipal Drain under sections 48 and 54 of the Drainage Act.

The appellants raised concerns regarding the necessity of certain branch drains, the requirement to participate in a common stormwater management pond, water quality monitoring, and the appropriateness of their assessments.

The Tribunal ordered the deletion of the upper portion of Branch Drain #8, allowed landowners to opt out of the stormwater management pond, provided for water quality monitoring for the Cytec property, and adjusted certain assessments accordingly.

The engineer was directed to consolidate the changes into a revised report.

Allanport Road Municipal Drain (Re), 2001 ONAFRAAT 32

OAFRAATAgriculture, Food & Rural Affairs Appeal TribunalJun 15, 2001

Special assessments for drain improvements reduced where municipality incurred engineering costs before resolving environmental concerns.

The appellant appealed the special assessments levied against his properties for improvements to a municipal drain.

The original plan to close the drain was rejected by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans due to fish habitat concerns, resulting in a revised engineer's report and increased engineering costs.

The Tribunal found that the municipality and the engineer should have resolved the environmental issues before incurring significant design costs, and that the municipality improperly directed the preparation of a report that conflicted with the DFO's prohibition.

The Tribunal ordered the special assessments against the appellant and other landowners reduced, with the balance of the engineering costs assessed to the municipality.

Jim McLaughlin v. Town of Minto, 2001 ONAFRAAT 31

Page 5 of 6 (118 cases)

agent for appellant Jennifer Noss

Wanda NicowskiAgent
1 appearance

agent for Lois Hayter

Glenn HayterAgent
1 appearance

agent for Margaret Mitchell, assessed landowner

Allan ButtonAgent
1 appearance

an assessed owner

Al McGregorSelf-represented
1 appearance
Donald SkipperSelf-represented
1 appearance

appellant

Keith ArmstrongSelf-represented
2 appearances
Joanne CookSelf-represented
2 appearances
Belfa ThomasSelf-represented
2 appearances
Bonnie McDonaldSelf-represented
1 appearance
Brent RutledgeSelf-represented
1 appearance
Carolyn BoyceSelf-represented
1 appearance
David BoyceSelf-represented
1 appearance
Donald Dewayne HutchisonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Elaine MellingSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ethel BarkerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Glen GearingSelf-represented
1 appearance
Grant BurksSelf-represented
1 appearance
Heinz ProbstSelf-represented
1 appearance
Helen GrattoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Helmut FunkeSelf-represented
1 appearance
Helmut RempelSelf-represented
1 appearance
Herb BathoSelf-represented
1 appearance
James DeanSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jennifer NossSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jim HoggSelf-represented
1 appearance

Appellant

Norm WalkerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Herbert GallawaySelf-represented
1 appearance

Appellant and assessed landowner

Andrea ClemencioSelf-represented
1 appearance
Louis VargaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jackie OrgarSelf-represented
1 appearance
Dave OrgarSelf-represented
1 appearance
Clifford TattersallSelf-represented
1 appearance

Appellant and landowner

Sylvain GauthierSelf-represented
1 appearance
Misty GauthierSelf-represented
1 appearance
Donald WaglerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Garry BeachSelf-represented
1 appearance
Harry BarclaySelf-represented
1 appearance
Lois LockhartSelf-represented
1 appearance
Maja MielonenSelf-represented
1 appearance
Marjorie BeachSelf-represented
1 appearance

appellant and representative of Lorne Ireland, appellant

Glenn IrelandSelf-represented
1 appearance

appellant, JEMA Foods

Jim DiMennaAgent
1 appearance

Appellants

Fatima MarganSelf-represented
1 appearance
Trifu MarganSelf-represented
1 appearance

assessed landowner

Ken HamblySelf-represented
2 appearances
Daryl LoucksSelf-represented
2 appearances
Evelyn HamblySelf-represented
2 appearances
Gerry BakerSelf-represented
2 appearances
Gary LoveSelf-represented
1 appearance
G. DeWitSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gerry DewitSelf-represented
1 appearance
Grant LoveSelf-represented
1 appearance
Hank GorisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Hugh WalkerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jackie ConnellySelf-represented
1 appearance
Jack WilkinsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jacqueline ConnellySelf-represented
1 appearance
Jan Van NulandSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jerry BakerSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jim LoveSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jim WilsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Joe GroszeiblSelf-represented
1 appearance
Joe Isley Jr.Self-represented
1 appearance
Joe MurphySelf-represented
1 appearance

Assessed Landowner

John KuiperSelf-represented
1 appearance
John Kuiper Jr.Self-represented
1 appearance

assessed landowner, 14 Charles St.

Gerry BakerSelf-represented
1 appearance

assessed landowner, 19 Charles St.

Carl GillespieSelf-represented
1 appearance

assessed landowner, 26 Charles St.

Gerry DeWittSelf-represented
1 appearance

assessed landowner, appellant

Meredith FirthSelf-represented
1 appearance
Paul BrownSelf-represented
1 appearance
William O’HalloranSelf-represented
1 appearance

assessed landowner in the Elliott Drain watershed

Barbara BalogSelf-represented
1 appearance

assessed landowners

Barry HarwoodSelf-represented
1 appearance
Claude BourqueSelf-represented
1 appearance
David LaurenceSelf-represented
1 appearance

assessed landowner, witness

Jack BerkhoutAgent
1 appearance

assessed owner

Bruce SmithSelf-represented
1 appearance
Margaret BalgaSelf-represented
1 appearance
Steve ChapoSelf-represented
1 appearance

assisting the appellant

Marielle KlijnAgent
1 appearance

au nom de l’intimée, la municipalité

André DesjardinsAgent
1 appearance
Neil LevacAgent
1 appearance

Ausauble Bayfield Conservation Authority

Ryan HernAgent
1 appearance

Clerk of the Municipality

Brenda BruntAgent
1 appearance

Counsel for the Appellant, Regional Municipality of Waterloo

Richard BrookesCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Municipality

Scott McEachranCounsel
1 appearance

counsel for the respondent, the City of Kawartha Lakes

Rosalie EvansCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the respondent the Municipality of Chatham-Kent

Ronald RobertsonCounsel
1 appearance

Counsel for the Township

Paul CoureyCounsel
2 appearances

counsel to appellant

Noël BerthiaumeCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to appellants Leo Harju and John Grimo

Peter LingardCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to JEMA Foods

Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to Leo Harju, appellant and John Grimo, appellant Helen Gratto, appellant

Peter LingardCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to Mr. Leddy

Mike MitchellCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to Nexfor Inc., appellant

John CrossinghamCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the appellant

John LangloisCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the appellant, Donald Bailey

George ReynoldsCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the appellants

Delbert O’BrienCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the engineer

Andrew OsyanyCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the Municipality of Bluewater

Andrew WrightCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the Municipality of Leamington

Brian SweetCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the Municipality of Thames Centre

David BroadCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the respondent

Geoff SpurrCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the respondent, the City of St. Catharines

Lisa ValentiniCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the Township of Laurentian Valley

Roy ReicheCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the Township of Perth South

Gerry CullitonCounsel
1 appearance

counsel to the Tribunal

Michelle Douglas-CummingsIndependent Legal Counsel
1 appearance

Deputy Director of Public Works

Nick AragonaAgent
1 appearance

Deputy Reeve, Township of Brethour

Tom GoddardAgent
1 appearance

downstream landowner

Catherine KwarciakSelf-represented
1 appearance

drainage engineer on behalf of the Ministry of Transportation

John Van VorstAgent
1 appearance

drainage engineer who prepared report

E. Paul ElstonAgent
1 appearance
Mike DeVosAgent
1 appearance

drainage engineer who prepared the engineer's report

Paul ElstonAgent
1 appearance

Drainage Superintendent

Henri BennemeerAgent
1 appearance

Drainage Superintendent for Bradford West Gwillimbury and Township of King

Art JanseAgent
1 appearance

Drainage Superintendent for Municipality

Robert SheachAgent
1 appearance

Drainage Superintendent for the Municipality

Don LewisAgent
1 appearance
Harold HallAgent
1 appearance

drainage superintendent for the Municipality of Dutton/Dunwich, respondent

Ralph BeharrellAgent
1 appearance

Drainage Superintendent, for the Municipality of Thames Centre

Dennis ShandAgent
1 appearance

drainage superintendent for the Township of Southwold, assessed landowner

Brent ClutterbuckAgent
1 appearance

Drainage Superintendent on behalf of the Municipality

Wray RamseyAgent
1 appearance

Drainage Superintendent, Town of Minto

Chris PeterAgent
1 appearance

Drainage Superintendent, Township of West Lincoln

Harold KellyAgent
1 appearance

Engineer

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

engineer for the report

Bryon WiebeAgent
1 appearance
John R. SprietAgent
1 appearance
Kent SchachowskojAgent
1 appearance

Engineer for the Report

Bill DietrichAgent
1 appearance

Engineer, K. Smart Associates Limited

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

Engineer on behalf of the Municipality

John SprietAgent
1 appearance

Engineer, on behalf of the Municipality

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

Engineer responsible for the Report

John StidwillAgent
1 appearance

engineer who prepared report

Ken SmartAgent
1 appearance

engineer who prepared the addendum to the report

Ken SmartAgent
1 appearance

engineer who prepared the report

Gerard RoodAgent
1 appearance
Ken SmartAgent
1 appearance
Kent SchachowskojAgent
1 appearance
Mike DeVosAgent
1 appearance
Neil LevacAgent
1 appearance
Paul ElstonAgent
1 appearance

engineer who prepared the Report

Jeff DicksonAgent
1 appearance
John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance
Ken SmartAgent
1 appearance

Engineer who prepared the report

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance
John R. SprietAgent
1 appearance
Neil LevacAgent
1 appearance
Paul ElstonAgent
1 appearance

Engineer who prepared the Report

John KuntzeAgent
2 appearances
Gaetan H. LascellesAgent
1 appearance
Neal MorrisAgent
1 appearance
Thomas PridhamAgent
1 appearance

engineer who prepared the Report, for the Municipality of Leamington

Ed DriesAgent
1 appearance

for all of the appellants

Timothy FlanneryCounsel
1 appearance

for Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority

Alec ScottAgent
1 appearance

for Barlow Square Inc.

Mike DejeanAgent
1 appearance

for CFO

Geoffrey SpurrCounsel
1 appearance
Janet CioruchAgent
1 appearance

for Christ Church Huntingford

Robert WaltonAgent
1 appearance

for David Ashie and Patricia Ashie, affected landowners

Graham LordCounsel
1 appearance

for Dorian and Elizabeth Milleman

Elizabeth MillemanSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Fernand Gauthier

Garnet McDiarmidAgent
1 appearance

for Garry Beach

Marjorie BeachSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Geoff Bradley, Christine Bradley, Marjorie Tiemersma and Louise Tiemersma

Donald R. GoodCounsel
1 appearance

for Glen Tulpin

Julien DeplanckeAgent
1 appearance

for Grand River Conservation Authority

Jennifer WrightAgent
1 appearance

for Haldimand County, the respondent

John SprietAgent
1 appearance

for herself

Connie CurtisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Lois LockhartSelf-represented
1 appearance
Maria BonigutSelf-represented
1 appearance
Cindy SauveSelf-represented
1 appearance
Maja MielonenSelf-represented
1 appearance

for himself

Robert CareySelf-represented
2 appearances
Martin BonigutSelf-represented
1 appearance
Milton SmithSelf-represented
1 appearance
Nick WallSelf-represented
1 appearance
Paul GarrahSelf-represented
1 appearance
Perry AnglinSelf-represented
1 appearance
Peter HutchisonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ron GleasonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Stuart GomesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Sylvain GauthierSelf-represented
1 appearance
Tom GivensSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ulrich SchaererSelf-represented
1 appearance
Victor ReasbeckSelf-represented
1 appearance
Allan SimpsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Bob KordybanSelf-represented
1 appearance
David DawsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Fernand GauthierSelf-represented
1 appearance
Garry BeachSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gary RupkeSelf-represented
1 appearance
Guy DurocherSelf-represented
1 appearance

for himself and Robert and Annette Anderson

Bruce ChrustieSelf-represented
1 appearance

for J. & B.P. Van Beets, Petitioner

Ike Van BeetsAgent
1 appearance

for Kenneth and Lynda Anderson

Dennis H. AsherCounsel
1 appearance

for K. Smart Associates Ltd.

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

for Lawrence and Connie Curtis

Adam WhiteCounsel
1 appearance
Ian DonnellCounsel
1 appearance

for Maria Janzen

Suzanna JanzenAgent
1 appearance

for Martin and Maria Bonigut

Dr. William ConradAgent
1 appearance

former Deputy Reeve

Lawrie WepplerSelf-represented
1 appearance

former Reeve of the municipality

Denis PommainvilleSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Michael Brausam, assessed landowner

Valerie M’GarryCounsel
1 appearance

for Montreal Soaring Council, assessed landowner

Walter EkiertAgent
1 appearance

for Mr. Carl King

Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance

for Ms. Cindy Sauve and assessed landowners

Andrew RobinsonAgent
1 appearance

for Perry Anglin

Aimee AnglinAgent
1 appearance

for R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited

Jeremy TaylorAgent
1 appearance
Tom PridhamAgent
1 appearance

for Robert and David Groszeibl, Joseph and Elizabeth Groszeibl, and Mr. William Van Vliet

Christopher WilsonCounsel
1 appearance

for Ron Gleason

Kelly YerxaCounsel
1 appearance

for Sure Fresh Foods Inc.

Andrew HealCounsel
1 appearance
Hank Van VoorstAgent
1 appearance

for Sylvain Gauthier

Misty GauthierSelf-represented
1 appearance

for Tampa Farms Ltd., K. Fowler, B.&M. Vandenberg, B. Vandenberg, H. Stoelinga, R. Graham, F.&R. Graham, J.&R. Graham, Oakwood Agromart Ltd., 1035485 Ontario Ltd., G. Butterworth et al., J. Everson, J. Garland, J.&J. Hickson and J. Hickson

William TurvilleCounsel
2 appearances

for Tampa Farms Ltd., K. Fowler, B.&M. Vandenberg, B. Vandenberg, H. Stoelinga, R.&L. Graham and J.&R. Graham

William TurvilleCounsel
1 appearance

for the appellant

Peter KlijnSelf-represented
2 appearances
Keith VanderbekeAgent
1 appearance
Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance
Sheldon PettleCounsel
1 appearance
Tony DecooAgent
1 appearance
Barry CardCounsel
1 appearance
Carl MulockSelf-represented
1 appearance
David JohnstonAgent
1 appearance
Donald JefferyAgent
1 appearance
Ed DriesAgent
1 appearance
John LangloisCounsel
1 appearance

for the Appellant

Ashok SoodAgent
1 appearance
Danny BranoffAgent
1 appearance
Donald GoodCounsel
1 appearance

for the appellant landowner

Ken TovellSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the appellant Milton Smith

Bryon WiebeAgent
1 appearance

for the appellant, Mr. Carl King

Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance

for the appellant, Paul and Nancy Brown

John WiebeAgent
1 appearance

for the appellants

April ComazzoloSelf-represented
1 appearance
David RobySelf-represented
1 appearance
Joseph ComazzoloSelf-represented
1 appearance
Marianne HatchSelf-represented
1 appearance
Michael L. FowlerCounsel
1 appearance
Norm SutherlandAgent
1 appearance
Robert F. HatchSelf-represented
1 appearance
Vic SauroAgent
1 appearance

for the Appellants

Arthur SimpsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jacqueline SimpsonSelf-represented
1 appearance
Numerous appellantsSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the appellants, Arnold and Sandra Abrams

Allard ColynAgent
1 appearance

for the appellants, Finlay and Edith McCormick

Rod McCormickAgent
1 appearance

for the appellants, Heinz and Christine Probst

Thomas RichardsonCounsel
1 appearance

for the appellants Louise Tiemersma, Marjorie Tiemersma, Geoffrey Bradley, Christine Bradley

Donald GoodCounsel
1 appearance

for the appellants Orland and Freida Dippel

Stephen DippelAgent
1 appearance

for the appellants, Ralph & Shirley Clayton

Ralph ClaytonSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Appellant, the OMTA

David BrisbinCounsel
1 appearance

for the applicant, the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury

Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance

for the City of Kawartha Lakes

R. J. SwainCounsel
1 appearance
Valerie M’GarryCounsel
1 appearance

for the City of Kingston

Jim EnglishAgent
1 appearance

for the City of Ottawa

Cathy CrosbyCounsel
1 appearance

for the City of Port Colborne

Bryon WiebeAgent
1 appearance
Cam MilneAgent
1 appearance
Rene LandryAgent
1 appearance

for the City of St. Thomas

Burt LongAgent
1 appearance

for the County of Simcoe

Jim HunterAgent
1 appearance
Shari ElliotCounsel
1 appearance

for the DFO

Dave NolanAgent
1 appearance
John CoreAgent
1 appearance

for the Estate of Harold Yeo

Lenus YeoSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Estate of Henry Houser Vanderburgh, appellant

Malcolm VanderburghAgent
1 appearance

for the municipality

John D. ValleeAgent
1 appearance

for the Municipality

Bruce CrozierAgent
1 appearance
Denise DeforgeAgent
1 appearance
Dennis ShandAgent
1 appearance
Jim RenickCounsel
1 appearance
John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance
John R. SprietAgent
1 appearance
Richard StevensAgent
1 appearance
Wray RamsayAgent
1 appearance

for the Municipality of Central Elgin

Donald LietchAgent
1 appearance

for the Municipality of Central Huron

Geoff KingAgent
1 appearance

for the Municipality of Chatham-Kent

Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Municipality of Dutton/Dunwich, respondent

Wybe CnossenAgent
1 appearance

for the Municipality of Thames Centre

David BroadCounsel
2 appearances
D. BroadCounsel
1 appearance

for the Municipality of West Perth

Jim DemerlingAgent
1 appearance
Ken ClarkeAgent
1 appearance
Patricia TaylorAgent
1 appearance

for the OFCTGMB, the respondent

Barry BresnerCounsel
1 appearance

for the OMTA

John WishartAgent
1 appearance

for the owners of roll numbers 660-036 and 660-037

Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondent

George BanksCounsel
1 appearance
John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance
Laura EdenAgent
1 appearance
Ron SwainCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondent, Municipality of North Perth

Andrew OsyanyAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, Municipality of Southwest Middlesex

Dennis McCreadyAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the City of Kawartha Lakes

Tom PridhamAgent
1 appearance
Valerie M’GarryCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondent, the City of London

Phillip McNeelyAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, The Corporation of the Township of Perth East

Paul ElstonAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the DFO

Geoff SpurrCounsel
1 appearance

for the respondent, the Municipality of West Elgin

Dennis R. McCreadyAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the Town of Amherstburg

Bruce CrozierAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the Township of Ashfield-Colborne-Wawanosh

J. A. McBrideAgent
1 appearance
J. R. DicksonAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the Township of Malahide

John R. SprietAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the Township of Melancthon

Tom PridhamAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the Township of Norfolk

John R. SprietAgent
1 appearance
Peter Bryan-PulhamAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the Township of Wainfleet

John R. SprietAgent
1 appearance
Ralph BradleyAgent
1 appearance

for the respondent, the Township of West Grey

William J. MannerowAgent
1 appearance

for the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury

Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance

for the Town of Caledon

Nadia KoltunCounsel
1 appearance

for the Town of Newmarket and the Town of East Gwillimbury

Susan PlamondonCounsel
1 appearance

for the Town of New Tecumseth

William D. TurvilleCounsel
1 appearance

for the Township of Ashfield-Colborne-Wawanosh

Valerie M'GarryCounsel
1 appearance

for the Township of King

Josie MateraCounsel
1 appearance

for the Township of Leeds and Thousand Islands

John A. TrudgenAgent
1 appearance

for the Township of Middlesex Centre, respondent

Andrew WrightCounsel
1 appearance

for the Township of Norfolk

John R. SprietAgent
1 appearance

for the Township of Southwold

Brent ClutterbuckAgent
1 appearance

for the Township of Wainfleet

George BanksCounsel
1 appearance

for the Township, the respondent

Tom PridhamAgent
1 appearance

for the upstream agricultural appellants

Janet McGuigan KellyCounsel
1 appearance

for Westview Church

George BartlettAgent
1 appearance

landowner

Donna MichlowskiSelf-represented
1 appearance
Everett GrotenhuisSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gordon SouthSelf-represented
1 appearance
Margaret WenzelSelf-represented
1 appearance

Landowner

David DouglasSelf-represented
1 appearance
Wayne LeggeSelf-represented
1 appearance

late appellant

Jennifer NossSelf-represented
1 appearance

legal counsel for Township of Blandford-Blenheim - Respondent

Paul CoureyCounsel
1 appearance

on behalf of Donna Whitlock, appellant

Leonard WhitlockSelf-represented
1 appearance

on behalf of Gary Beach, assessed landowner

Al FrasierAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of Judith McDonald, assessed landowner, appellant

Robert GottAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of Maurice Cheveaux, assessed landowner

Andrew DegrootAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of Mr. J. Swain, assessed landowner

Mary QuinnAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the appellant

David JohnsonAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the appellants

Melodie FoersterAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the Municipality

Janisse ZimmermanAgent
1 appearance
Patrick HaggittAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the Municipality of West Perth

Mike KraemerAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the Orr Lake Golf Club, assessed landowner

Jason HarrisAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the respondent the Municipality of Chatham-Kent

Enio P. SulloAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the respondent, the Nation Municipality

Neil LevacAgent
1 appearance
Stéphane LeclercAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the respondent, the Town of Essex

Don JoudreyAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the respondent the Township of Ahfield-Colborne-Wawanosh

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the Township of Brock

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

on behalf of the Township of Southwold

M.P. De VosAgent
1 appearance
Ralph BeharrellAgent
1 appearance

Partner of Maja Mielonen

Guy NielenAgent
1 appearance

P. Eng.

Bryon WeibeAgent
1 appearance
Kent SchachowskojAgent
1 appearance

principal of Mancini Homes, the appellant

Angelo ManciniAgent
1 appearance

Public Works Superintendent for the Township of Adjala-Tosorntio

Jim MossAgent
1 appearance

Reeve of Municipality

Richard StephensAgent
1 appearance

Reeve, Township of Ashfield-Colborne-Wawanosh

Ben Van DiepenbeekAgent
1 appearance

représentant l’appelant

Noël BerthiaumeAgent
1 appearance

representative for Dunford Royal Cattle Company Inc. – Appellant

Casey FantaAgent
1 appearance

Representative for Garry Beach

Al FrasierAgent
2 appearances

representative of 1494883 Ontario Limited, assessed landowner

David OliverAgent
1 appearance

representative of Cuddy Farms, assessed landowner

John CameronAgent
1 appearance

representative of Leanne Landers and Stephen Herman, appellants

Barbara HermanAgent
1 appearance

representative of upstream agricultural owners

John McGuiganAgent
1 appearance

representing 91869 Ontario Incorporated, appellant Rick Fischuk, appellant

Bob RobinsonAgent
1 appearance

representing 918969 Ontario Incorporated, appellant

Bob RobinsonAgent
1 appearance

representing appellants Richard Gosselin and Garry Beach, and assessed landowner Sylvain Gauthier

Al FraserAgent
1 appearance

representing assessed landowner Anna Isley

John IsleyAgent
1 appearance

representing assessed landowner Frank Iannialice

Jack DavisAgent
1 appearance

representing Cytec Canada Inc., appellant

George SlaneyAgent
1 appearance

representing Cytec Canada Inc., appellant Helmut Rempel, appellant

George SlaneyAgent
1 appearance

representing Daryll and Lyle Betts (Roll No. 40-090) and Darta Farms Ltd (Roll No. 40-075), Walter and Katherine Betts (Roll Nos. 40-074 and 40-092), assessed upstream landowners

Andy McBrideAgent
1 appearance

representing D. & K. Loucks, M. & K. Dimitrick, W. & B. Reid, V. & S. Chanyi, G. DeWit, T. Buys, R. Zweers, W. Zweers, S Fielder & C. Agnew, M. Leal, R. & L. Vanbesien, P. Reid, R. Tipping, J. Woulters, T. Moonen and M. Mitchell.

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

representing Efelar Holdings Ltd., assessed landowner

Frank RothAgent
1 appearance

representing Henry Hauser estate, appellant John Grimo, appellant

Malcolm VanderburghAgent
1 appearance

representing James Dean, appellant

Mark NowakAgent
1 appearance

representing Margaret Mitchell, assessed landowner 15 Charles St.

Allen BuddenAgent
1 appearance

representing Percy Steele, assessed landowner

Jack SteeleAgent
1 appearance

representing Provincial Construction (Niagara Falls) Ltd.

Sam KitsonAgent
1 appearance

representing R.J.Burnside & Associates Ltd. (the "Engineer")

Paul ElstonAgent
1 appearance

representing Royal Bourdeau and René Giroux, Jean-Claude Pavan, Ralph (Rapheal) Gour, Royal Bourdeau, René Giroux, appellants

Jean MartelCounsel
1 appearance

representing Shevaun Day, an appellant

Steve VoisinAgent
1 appearance

representing the appellants in the appeal Elite Swine and Cold Springs Farm Ltd. and also representing Progressive Pork Producer’s Co-operative Inc., Selves Farms Limited and Synergy Services Inc.

Robert ShapiroCounsel
1 appearance

representing the City of Kawartha Lakes

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

representing the municipality

John KuntzeAgent
1 appearance

representing the Municipality

André DesjardinsAgent
1 appearance

representing the respondent in the appeal, the OPPMB

Sean ForanCounsel
1 appearance

representing the respondent, the City of Kawartha Lakes

Tom PridhamAgent
1 appearance

representing Walynn Enterprises Inc., appellant

Tracy BakerAgent
1 appearance

Secretary/Treasurer of 517749 Ontario Ltd on behalf of Mr. Mario Valletta, assessed landowner in the Elliott Drain watershed

Lucy VallettaAgent
1 appearance

Spouse of Perry Anglin, Appellant

Aimee AnglinAgent
1 appearance

Tampa Bay Farms, assessed landowner

Terry ParkerSelf-represented
1 appearance

witness

Keith BathoSelf-represented
1 appearance
Ronald BaileyAgent
1 appearance

witness for the Municipality

Greg DemingAgent
1 appearance

118

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

0.7

cases/mo

OAFRAAT118(100%)

Decision types

appeal

102

motion

Page 5 of 6 (118 cases)