8 total
Tribunal awards $16,500 for expropriated land but dismisses injurious affection claims regarding truck access and septic system.
The claimant sought compensation under the Expropriations Act for the market value of expropriated lands and damages for injurious affection relating to a septic system and the alleged loss of an unregistered easement for truck access.
The Ontario Land Tribunal determined the market value of the taking was $16,500.
The Tribunal dismissed the claims for injurious affection, finding no valid easement existed, truck access was not materially impaired, and the septic system issues were fully mitigated by the respondent's repairs and offer to reconvey the affected land.
The Tribunal also held that the respondent's offer to reconvey land did not constitute a Notice of Abandonment under section 41 of the Act.
Proposed expropriation of lands to resolve encroachment and facilitate development found fair, sound, and reasonably necessary.
The City of Windsor sought to expropriate lands owned by the property owners to consolidate them with an adjacent parcel acquired by the City due to tax arrears, in order to resolve an encroachment issue and facilitate future development.
The property owners requested a Hearing of Necessity under the Expropriations Act.
The Ontario Land Tribunal found that the proposed expropriation was fair, sound, and reasonably necessary to achieve the City's objectives, noting that the owners offered no evidence to contradict the City's stated intentions and that the case law relied upon by the owners was distinguishable.
Costs motion dismissed; unsuccessful motion to amend pleadings did not constitute unreasonable or bad faith conduct.
The Claimant brought a motion for costs on a substantial indemnity scale following the Tribunal's dismissal of the Respondent's motion for leave to amend its Reply to plead a limitation period under the Expropriations Act.
The Claimant argued the Respondent's conduct was unreasonable, frivolous, vexatious, and in bad faith due to an 11-year delay in seeking the amendment.
The Tribunal dismissed the costs motion, finding that while the Respondent's motion was unsuccessful, it was not devoid of merit, did not cause delay, and did not meet the high threshold of unreasonable or bad faith conduct required to award costs.
Motion to amend pleading denied due to six-year delay causing non-compensable prejudice to the claimant.
The Ministry of Transportation brought a motion for leave to amend its Reply to plead the limitation period under section 22 of the Expropriations Act, six years after the original Reply was filed.
The claimant opposed the motion, arguing that the delay caused non-compensable prejudice as evidence and witnesses from the time of the expropriation were no longer available.
The Ontario Land Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that the six-year delay was so lengthy that prejudice was presumed, and the claimant had also demonstrated actual prejudice.
The Ministry failed to rebut the presumption of prejudice or provide an adequate explanation for the delay.
Tribunal approves procedural order and schedules nine-day hearing for expropriation compensation claim.
The Tribunal held a status hearing regarding an expropriation proceeding brought by the claimant seeking compensation from the Ministry of Transportation.
The parties updated the Tribunal on the preparation of a draft Procedural Order and Issues List, which were subsequently filed and approved.
The Tribunal scheduled a nine-day video hearing to commence on May 15, 2023, after the parties reported that settlement discussions had been unsuccessful.
Hearing dates maintained on a peremptory basis pending confirmation of executed Minutes of Settlement.
A status hearing was held regarding a claim for land compensation following an expropriation by the Ministry of Transportation.
The parties advised that draft Minutes of Settlement were under review by the Ministry.
The Tribunal directed the Ministry to advise as soon as possible whether the settlement was executed, and ordered that the scheduled hearing dates would remain on a peremptory basis if the settlement was not finalized.
Hearing scheduled after respondent failed to attend case management conference or finalize settlement.
The claimant sought compensation for land expropriated by the Ministry of Transportation.
Following a period of non-communication from the respondent regarding an unformalized settlement, the claimant requested a case management conference.
The respondent's counsel failed to attend the conference.
The Tribunal scheduled a four-day hearing on the merits and a prior status hearing to confirm if the settlement had been finalized.
Tribunal schedules 6-day virtual hearing and updates Procedural Order for land compensation claim.
The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference to obtain a status update and set a new hearing date for a land compensation claim under the Expropriations Act.
The parties agreed to proceed to a 6-day virtual hearing.
The Tribunal scheduled the hearing for March 7, 2022, and directed the parties to update the Procedural Order accordingly.
