Susan F. Mather

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought medical benefits and the cost of an assessment from the respondent insurer.

The respondent denied the claims, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline limit of $3,500.

The adjudicator found that the applicant's injuries did not fall within the Guideline because she suffered from chronic pain that was more than a sequelae of a predominantly minor injury.

The adjudicator approved four of the six disputed treatment plans as reasonable and necessary, noting they provided pain relief and increased function, but denied two plans that were either duplicative or showed minimal progress.

The applicant was awarded interest on overdue payments, and both parties' requests for costs were dismissed.

The moving party, Exchange Corporation Canada Inc., brought a motion for the production of documents from the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) relating to the assessment of Terminal T1 New at Pearson Airport.

On consent of the parties, the Assessment Review Board ordered MPAC to produce income and expense information, leases, rent rolls, operating statements, and rental analyses used to determine the 2003, 2005, and 2008 base year current value assessments for the 2004-2011 taxation years.

The production was made subject to the execution of confidentiality undertakings by legal counsel and consultants, with an exception for the Greater Toronto Airports Authority.

The moving parties, various car rental companies, brought a motion before the Assessment Review Board regarding the production of documents by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC).

On consent of the parties, the Board ordered MPAC to produce income and expense information, leases, rent rolls, operating statements, and rental analyses used to determine the base year current value assessments for the 2004-2011 taxation years.

The production was conditional upon the receipt of executed confidentiality undertakings from legal counsel and consultants, except for the Greater Toronto Airports Authority.

The Board also scheduled a further prehearing event by telephone conference.

The moving parties brought a motion for the production of confidential information from MPAC, including income and expense information, leases, rent rolls, and operating statements used to determine base year current value assessments.

The Assessment Review Board issued a consent order requiring MPAC to produce the requested information subject to the execution of confidentiality undertakings by the moving parties' counsel and consultants.

The order specified the manner of production and scheduled a further prehearing event.

Arbor Memorial Incorporated brought a motion seeking relief under s. 40.1 of the Assessment Act, arguing there were palpable errors in the assessment roll for the 2004-2007 taxation years.

The property was assessed as 37.63 acres and coded as a golf course, failing to reflect a 2003 conveyance of 16 acres (including the golf course) to the Town of Oakville.

The Board found this constituted a palpable error.

Despite the passage of over 10 years, the Board exercised its discretion to extend the time for appeals and directed MPAC to be the appellant, finding that the unfairness to the taxpayer in paying taxes on land it no longer owned outweighed any prejudice to the Town or MPAC.

The moving parties, retail tenants at Toronto Pearson International Airport, brought a motion for the production of assessment details, market information, and valuation records from the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC).

The Assessment Review Board ordered MPAC to produce the requested documents, subject to the execution of strict confidentiality and non-disclosure undertakings by the moving parties' legal counsel and consultants, to protect the sensitive commercial information of other airport tenants and regional shopping centres.

The moving parties, who operate retail businesses at Toronto Pearson International Airport, brought a motion for the production of assessment details, rent rolls, and market information from MPAC regarding various airport and shopping centre properties.

The Assessment Review Board ordered MPAC to produce the requested information, subject to the execution of strict confidentiality and non-disclosure undertakings by the moving parties' counsel and consultants to protect the sensitive business information of the affected property owners and tenants.

The appellant, Mississauga Complex Portfolio Inc., brought a motion for the production of documents from the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) relating to the assessment of third-party properties.

On consent of the parties, the Assessment Review Board ordered MPAC to produce income, expense, rent roll, lease information, and other valuation documents for the specified properties.

The production was made subject to the execution of confidentiality and non-disclosure undertakings by the appellant's legal counsel and expert consultants.

The appeals were adjourned to a prehearing conference.

The appellant brought a motion for the production of documents from the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) relating to the assessment of a property in Mississauga.

On consent of the parties, the Assessment Review Board ordered MPAC to produce income, expense, rent roll, lease information, and other documents for specified third-party properties, subject to the appellant's counsel and consultants executing undertakings of confidentiality and non-disclosure.

The appeals were adjourned to a prehearing conference.

The appellant brought a motion for the production of documents relating to the assessment of several third-party properties.

On consent of the parties, the Assessment Review Board ordered the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation to produce the requested income, expense, lease, and valuation information, subject to the execution of confidentiality and non-disclosure undertakings by the appellant's counsel and consultants.

The applicant car rental companies brought a motion for disclosure of confidential financial information received from the Greater Toronto Airports Authority and other tenants.

On consent of the parties, the Assessment Review Board issued a procedural order setting the schedule for the motion and permitting alternative methods of service on non-parties.

The appellants brought a motion to compel MPAC to produce documents containing confidential information received from the Greater Toronto Airports Authority or other tenants, and for an order providing for alternative service on non-parties.

On consent of the parties, the Assessment Review Board granted the procedural order setting out the timeline for filing and serving motion materials and the method of service on assessed persons.

The appellants appealed the property assessments of their residential and farm properties for the 2011-2014 taxation years, arguing that the values should be reduced by 25% to 65% due to the potential impact of proposed industrial wind turbines and hydro-electric transmission lines in the area.

The Assessment Review Board found that as of the relevant valuation days (January 1, 2008 and January 1, 2012), there were no wind turbines in the immediate vicinity and the sales evidence supported the assessed values.

The Board reduced the residential property assessment slightly to account for the poor condition of outbuildings but otherwise confirmed the assessments, finding no evidence to support a reduction based on the proximity to wind turbines.

The appellant appealed the 2014 and deemed 2015 property assessments for a residential property that also housed a limousine business.

The appellant argued that MPAC's multiple regression model overvalued the land and that the apportionment of the commercial property class was incorrect.

The Assessment Review Board confirmed the current value of the property at $815,000, finding that the sales evidence supported the assessment and declining to adjust the model's variables.

However, the Board adjusted the apportionment between the residential and commercial property classes, reducing the commercial portion from $33,700 to $27,000 based on the area used for the limousine business.

The Assessment Review Board held a pre-hearing telephone conference to set a procedural order for the appeals, following the resolution of an issue sent back to the Ontario Municipal Board.

On consent of the parties, the Board ordered a schedule for the exchange of statements of issues, productions, and examinations for discovery, and scheduled a further telephone conference call to review the status of the appeals.