Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardApr 5, 2019

MPAC's motion for property inspection denied as the only issue in dispute was equity.

MPAC brought a motion for an order to inspect the subject property, arguing that the costing of the property was in issue.

The respondent opposed the motion, asserting that the only issue in dispute was the equity of the assessment.

The Assessment Review Board denied the motion, finding that the respondent's Statement of Issues only raised equity arguments, which rely on the assessments of other properties and cannot be resolved through an inspection.

The Board also noted that the length of time since the last inspection is not a valid basis for an inspection order.

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 29 v. 2226776 Ontario Limited, 2019 CanLII 29133

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 22, 2019

Assessment appeals dismissed due to property owner's failure to serve a Statement of Issues.

MPAC brought a motion to dismiss the property owner's assessment appeals for the 2017 and 2018 taxation years due to the owner's failure to serve a Statement of Issues.

The owner did not respond to MPAC's communications or file any materials for the motion.

The Assessment Review Board found the owner in clear and egregious breach of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, causing prejudice to MPAC's case management.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

1663150 Ontario Inc. v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 3, 2019 CanLII 22924

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 21, 2019

Property assessment appeals dismissed due to appellant's failure to serve a Statement of Issues.

The moving party brought a motion to dismiss the respondent's property assessment appeals for the 2017 and 2018 taxation years due to the respondent's failure to serve a Statement of Issues.

The respondent did not respond to the motion.

The Assessment Review Board found that the respondent's failure to comply with the Rules was clear, egregious, and unilateral, causing prejudice to the moving party's case management.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) Region 3 v. Hamzo Properties Inc., 2019 CanLII 22881

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 21, 2019

Motion for late assessment appeal denied because the application was filed beyond the 30-day deadline.

The moving party sought permission to file a late appeal of the 2018 assessment for a vacant commercial lot.

Under Rule 26(b) of the Assessment Review Board Rules of Practice and Procedure, a late appeal may be accepted if the party was entitled to a notice of assessment, did not receive it, and filed the appeal within 30 days of becoming aware of the assessment.

Although the moving party established he did not receive the notice of assessment, he admitted to receiving the municipal tax notice on March 1, 2018, but failed to file the appeal within 30 days of that date.

Consequently, the motion for late filing was denied.

Nguyen Thu v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, 2019 CanLII 22884

Tenant permitted to file late property tax appeal after landlord failed to provide timely notice.

The moving party, a tenant responsible for paying property taxes, sought permission to file a late appeal of a 2018 property assessment under Rule 26(b) of the Assessment Review Board Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The tenant argued it was entitled to a copy of the notice of assessment from the landlord under s. 35(2) of the Assessment Act, but did not receive it until nearly six months later.

The Board found that the tenant was a person entitled to receive a notice of assessment and that the landlord's failure to provide it justified the late appeal.

Although the application was filed three days after the 30-day deadline, the Board exercised its discretion under Rule 17 to extend the time, citing fairness and lack of prejudice to the respondent.

The motion to file a late appeal was granted.

Emblem Logistics Inc. v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, 2019 CanLII 22918

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 19, 2019

Assessment appeals dismissed due to property owner's failure to serve a Statement of Issues.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the property owner's assessment appeals for the 2017 and 2018 taxation years.

The property owner failed to serve a Statement of Issues by the deadline set in the schedule of events and did not respond to MPAC's subsequent request.

The Assessment Review Board found the property owner in clear and egregious breach of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, which prejudiced MPAC's case management.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

1041259 Ontario Inc. v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 3, 2019 CanLII 22919

Subuloa Awoleri

OARB0 cases2019–2019

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 19, 2019

Property assessment appeals dismissed due to taxpayers' uncorrected failure to serve a Statement of Issues.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the taxpayers' property assessment appeals for the 2017 and 2018 taxation years.

The taxpayers failed to serve a Statement of Issues by the required deadline and indicated they did not oppose the dismissal.

The Assessment Review Board found the taxpayers in clear breach of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, which prejudiced MPAC's case management.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 15 v. Marilyn Griffin and Barbra Goodman, 2019 CanLII 22920

Stephen Longo

47 cases2010–2026

Carl Davis

27 cases2015–2020

Scott McAnsh

Requests for admission to Special Property Program and extension of time denied due to lack of complexity and exceptional circumstances.

The appellant and MPAC requested admission to the Board's Special Property Program to dispense with the requirement to file expert reports, and sought an extension of time to meet their disclosure obligations after missing the deadlines in the Schedule of Events.

The Board denied both requests.

The property did not meet the complexity requirements for the Special Property Program, and the parties failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to justify altering the Schedule of Events under Rule 82.

Loblaw Properties Limited v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 20, 2019 CanLII 19491

Stephen Longo

47 cases2010–2026

Carl Davis

27 cases2015–2020

Scott McAnsh

Requests for admission to Special Property Program and extension of time denied.

The Board denied both requests.

The Board found that the property did not meet the complexity or special value considerations required for the Special Property Program.

Furthermore, the parties failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to justify altering the Schedule of Events under Rule 82.

Loblaw Properties Limited v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, 2019 CanLII 19490

Scott McAnsh

Pierre R. Lavigne

OARB2 cases2019–2025

Condominium assessment reduced due to by-law restricting student rentals impacting property value.

The appellant appealed the 2018 property assessment of his condominium unit, arguing the assessed value of $216,000 was too high.

The appellant contended that a recent condominium by-law restricting 'single-family' use to exclude unrelated students negatively impacted the property's value compared to neighbouring buildings without such restrictions.

The Assessment Review Board agreed, finding that sales occurring prior to the by-law change or in unrestricted neighbouring buildings were not comparable.

Relying on a post-by-law sale of an identical unit, the Board reduced the assessment to $182,500.

MacMillan v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, 2019 CanLII 22895

Scott McAnsh

Property assessment appeals dismissed due to taxpayers' failure to serve a Statement of Issues.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the property assessment appeals filed by the taxpayers for the 2013-2016 taxation years.

The taxpayers failed to serve a Statement of Issues by the required deadline and ignored subsequent requests from MPAC.

The Assessment Review Board found the taxpayers in clear and egregious breach of the Rules, which prejudiced MPAC's ability to manage the case.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation v. Yannopoulos, 2019 CanLII 22875

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 14, 2019

Request to reinstate withdrawn property assessment appeals denied due to insufficient evidence of error and timeliness.

The applicant requested the reinstatement of two property assessment appeals that it claimed were mistakenly withdrawn.

The Assessment Review Board denied the request under Rule 122(a) of its Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The Board found that the applicant failed to provide evidence of when the appeals were withdrawn to establish that the request was timely.

Furthermore, the applicant's affidavit merely stated a conclusion that the appeals were withdrawn in error without providing sufficient factual evidence to demonstrate a good faith error.

District Realty Corporation v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 03, 2019 CanLII 20817

Scott McAnsh

Jean-Paul Pilon

OARB0 cases2018–2023

Motion for leave to file late property assessment appeals denied for failing to meet mandatory requirements.

The moving parties requested leave to file late appeals for the 2017 and 2018 taxation years regarding a property assessment.

The moving parties argued they believed the resolution of a 2016 appeal would automatically apply to subsequent years.

The Assessment Review Board denied the motion, finding that the mandatory requirements of Rule 26(b) for accepting late appeals were not met, as there was no evidence that the moving parties failed to receive a notice of assessment or filed within 30 days of becoming aware of it.

Voislav Bjelajac and 2493957 Ontario Inc. v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) Region 19, 2019 CanLII 18794

Scott McAnsh

Assessment appeal dismissed due to appellant's failure to serve a statement of issues.

MPAC brought a motion to dismiss the property owner's 2016 assessment appeal because the owner failed to serve a statement of issues as required by the Board's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The owner did not respond to the motion.

The Board found the owner's breach was clear, egregious, and unilateral, and caused prejudice to MPAC's case management.

The motion was granted and the appeal was dismissed.

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation v. BCIMC Realty Corporation, 2019 CanLII 18797

Scott McAnsh

Motion for further disclosure in property assessment appeal dismissed as disproportionate and out of time.

The moving party, a property owner, brought a motion seeking an order to compel the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) to disclose information about comparable properties and the depreciation applied to buildings containing asbestos.

The Assessment Review Board dismissed the motion, finding that MPAC had already provided the comparable property information via its website, and the request for asbestos information was too broadly framed to be proportional.

The Board also noted the motion was brought out of time.

Raymond Wayne Adams v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, 2019 CanLII 18798

Scott McAnsh

Assessment appeals dismissed due to property owner's failure to serve a Statement of Issues.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the property owner's assessment appeals for the 2015 and 2016 taxation years because the owner failed to serve a Statement of Issues by the required deadline.

The owner did not respond to MPAC's requests or the motion.

The Assessment Review Board found that the owner's failure to comply with the Rules was a clear, egregious, and unilateral breach that prejudiced MPAC's ability to manage the case.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed pursuant to Rule 24(e).

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation v. 828543 Ontario Inc., 2019 CanLII 18793

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 6, 2019

Property assessment appeal reinstated after being withdrawn due to a good faith error.

The assessed person requested the reinstatement of a property assessment appeal that was withdrawn in error.

The applicant had two appeals for the 2018 taxation year and mistakenly withdrew the appeal for the corrected assessment instead of the original assessment after reaching a settlement with MPAC.

The Assessment Review Board found that the request met the requirements of Rule 122(a), as it was made by a party within 30 days and the withdrawal was a good faith error.

The request was granted and the appeal was reinstated.

1665637 Ontario Ltd. v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, 2019 CanLII 18791

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 5, 2019

Appeal dismissed because the underlying tax refund application was incomplete due to unpaid filing fees.

The respondent applied to the municipality for a tax refund due to renovations but failed to pay the required filing fee imposed by municipal by-law.

The respondent subsequently appealed to the Assessment Review Board, arguing the municipality failed to make a decision.

The municipality brought a motion to dismiss the appeal.

The Board granted the motion, finding that because the statutory filing fee was not paid, the application was never properly made to the municipality, and therefore no valid appeal could lie to the Board.

City of Mississauga v. Target Canada, 2019 CanLII 18795

Scott McAnsh

OARBAssessment Review BoardMar 5, 2019

Application for late property assessment appeal denied as extension request was not filed during the taxation year.

The moving party sought permission to file a late appeal of the 2017 assessment for a residential property, claiming he never received the assessment notice.

The Assessment Review Board denied the application, finding that Rule 26(b) does not apply to residential properties because the Assessment Act requires a mandatory request for reconsideration before an appeal can be filed.

Under subsection 40(4) of the Act, the Board can only extend the deadline for a request for reconsideration if the application is brought during the taxation year in question.

Since the application was brought in 2018 for a 2017 assessment, the Board lacked jurisdiction to grant the extension.

Paris Dryden v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, 2019 CanLII 18796

Scott McAnsh