Aisling Flarity

The Respondent, Metrolinx, brought a motion to compel the Claimants to answer undertakings and questions refused during an examination for discovery in an expropriation compensation proceeding.

The Claimants sought over $59 million in compensation but failed to provide particulars for their business loss and disturbance damage claims.

The Tribunal found the Claimants' refusals to answer questions regarding the highest and best use of the property and their allegations of bad faith to be unreasonable.

The motion was granted, and the Claimants were ordered to provide fulsome answers and pay $7,500 in costs to the Respondent.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent to govern the proceedings in a land compensation claim under the Expropriations Act.

The claim relates to the expropriation of property by Metrolinx for the construction of the Scarborough Subway Extension.

The order sets out the schedule for documentary discovery, examinations for discovery, expert meetings, and the exchange of witness statements leading up to a 10-day video hearing scheduled to commence on April 28, 2025.

The claimant's property was expropriated by Metrolinx for the construction of a subway station.

Following the claimant's death, a case management conference was adjourned multiple times to allow for the appointment of an estate trustee due to a dispute over the property's ownership.

After an estate trustee was appointed, the claimant requested a hearing date.

The Tribunal declined to schedule a hearing date over the respondent's objection that pleadings had not yet been exchanged.

The Tribunal ordered the claimant to deliver a Statement of Claim and the respondent to deliver a Reply, and adjourned the case management conference.

The Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding a claim for land compensation arising from the expropriation of parts of a property by Metrolinx for the Eglinton Crosstown LRT.

The parties advised they intended to file further amended pleadings and provided a draft Procedural Order.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and scheduled a five-day video hearing for November 2025.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding claims for compensation under the Expropriations Act related to the construction of the Toronto York Spadina Subway extension.

The parties advised that settlement discussions were advanced and requested a third CMC be scheduled pending finalization.

The Tribunal directed a third CMC to be held on November 14, 2024, and requested the claims be withdrawn if a full settlement is reached prior.

Metrolinx applied for approval to expropriate portions of the subject properties for a temporary easement to provide construction access for track work related to the SmartTrack Program and GO Expansion.

Following discussions, the parties agreed to a revised, non-exclusive temporary easement with a reduced area.

The Tribunal found the proposed revised taking to be fair, sound, and reasonably necessary to achieve Metrolinx's objectives of expanding and improving public transit services, and recommended approval of the expropriation.

The claimant in an expropriation proceeding brought a motion to admit an updated spreadsheet detailing its relocation expenses, which the Tribunal had previously refused to admit on the first day of the hearing due to late production.

The respondent opposed the motion, arguing it violated the Rules of Civil Procedure, was barred by issue estoppel, and constituted an abuse of process.

The Tribunal granted the motion, finding that the claimant provided a reasonable explanation for the late production, the respondent now had ample time to review the document, and the Tribunal's broad procedural powers allowed it to revisit evidentiary rulings to ensure a fair resolution on the merits.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a land compensation claim under the Expropriations Act.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal rescinded the previous procedural order and issued an amended procedural order setting out the schedule for discoveries, expert meetings, mediation, and the video hearing.

The claimant brought a motion for directions seeking an order requiring the respondent to provide responsive answers to undertakings and under advisements from an examination for discovery.

The underlying claim involves damages for expropriation, injurious affection, and trespass related to the Finch West LRT Project.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to answer several undertakings, including providing names on a redacted email, producing requests for drone photographs, and answering questions about access obstruction and internal policies, finding that the principle of proportionality under the Rules of Civil Procedure does not apply to land compensation proceedings under the Expropriations Act.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the expropriation of a commercial property for the construction of the Ontario Line Subway.

The Tribunal reviewed and approved a draft Procedural Order, set a three-day hearing date for March 2025, and established timelines for pre-hearing steps including discovery, mediation, and the exchange of expert reports.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the expropriation of a property used for electronic billboards.

The Tribunal directed the claimant to amend its Statement of Claim to remove a claim for punitive damages, as such damages are not available under the Act and the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to award them.

The parties agreed to a procedural order and scheduled a five-day hearing on the merits to determine compensation.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding three related claims for compensation arising from expropriations by the City of Toronto for the Toronto York Spadina Subway Extension.

The Tribunal ordered that the three claims be heard together due to their similar issues.

At the request of the parties, who were engaged in settlement discussions, the Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference and put the procedural order and issues list on hold.

This was a status hearing before the Ontario Land Tribunal regarding two claims for land compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal confirmed a 15-day hearing on the merits and ordered the claims to be heard together.

On consent, the claimant was granted leave to deliver an additional expert report regarding environmental status, and the respondent was granted leave to amend its replies.

A detailed hearing plan was appended to the order.

The expropriating authority applied to expropriate a temporary limited easement interest over a portion of the owner's property to regrade a driveway in connection with a light rail transit project.

The owner requested a hearing under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal found that the proposed taking was necessary to complete the regrading but lacked appropriate access.

The Tribunal concluded that the proposed taking would be fair, sound, and reasonably necessary only if modified to include adjacent access lands.

The Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from a permanent easement expropriated by Metrolinx.

The parties agreed to a five-day hearing on the merits and subsequently submitted a consent Procedural Order, Issues List, and Order of Evidence.

The Tribunal scheduled the hearing and issued the Procedural Order to govern the proceeding.

Metrolinx brought a motion to compel the Claimant to fulfill undertakings and answer refusals from an examination for discovery in an expropriation proceeding.

The Tribunal found the undertakings issue moot as they had been satisfied.

Regarding the refusals, the Tribunal ordered the Claimant to produce specific employment contracts, T4s, and invoices related to the expropriation and relocation, finding them relevant to the pleadings.

The remaining refusals were dismissed as irrelevant, and no costs were awarded.

At a Case Management Conference for an expropriation claim, the respondent Metrolinx sought a motion to compel the claimant to provide a further Supplementary Affidavit of Documents, arguing the current disclosure was inadequate to prepare for discoveries.

The Tribunal found the request premature, directing that the sufficiency of the evidence should be tested through the examination for discovery process and undertakings.

The Tribunal scheduled a four-day merit hearing and deferred any award of costs to the panel hearing the merits.

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.

Metrolinx sought to expropriate portions of common elements from three condominium corporations to facilitate the construction of a new SmartTrack/GO Train station.

The condominium owners requested a Hearing of Necessity under the Expropriations Act and sought an adjournment, arguing they received insufficient information about changes from full takings to easements.

The Tribunal denied the adjournment, finding Metrolinx met its statutory disclosure obligations.

On the merits, the Tribunal accepted expert engineering evidence that the takings were required for the station's construction and maintenance.

The Tribunal concluded the proposed fee simple takings and easements were fair, sound, and reasonably necessary to achieve Metrolinx's transit expansion objectives.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding a land compensation claim under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order and issues list on consent to govern the organization and requirements for the upcoming video hearing.