Ebaadh Rizwani

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

The Tribunal issued a procedural order setting the hearing to commence on May 31, 2027, for a period of nineteen days, and established timelines for the exchange of documents, discoveries, and expert reports.

Following a settlement agreement for the expropriation of the claimant's property, the claimant brought an application for costs under section 32(1) of the Expropriations Act.

The City of Toronto challenged the number of hours and the hourly rate billed by the claimant's counsel, and sought its own costs for the assessment.

The Tribunal found the claimant's counsel's hours and $700 hourly rate to be reasonable, rejecting the City's arguments and criticizing the City's counsel for inappropriate personal attacks.

The Tribunal deducted $5,667 for costs related to acquiring a replacement property but otherwise awarded the claimant $193,004 for the expropriation costs and an additional $20,250 for the costs of the application.

A pre-hearing conference was held regarding an application for compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The claimant's counsel was initially absent but later appeared.

The Tribunal reviewed the status of the proceedings, including witness lists and the potential for Formal Mediation.

The parties subsequently informed the Tribunal that a settlement had been reached and requested that the scheduled hearing dates be vacated.

The Tribunal ordered the parties to report on the completion of their settlement by December 12, 2024.

The claimants brought a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the expropriation of a permanent sub-surface easement beneath their residential property for a storm trunk sewer system.

At the case management conference, the parties agreed on a procedural order, issues list, and order of evidence.

The Tribunal issued the procedural order and scheduled a seven-day hearing on the merits.

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.

Counsel for the claimant failed to attend the initial CMC, leading to an adjournment.

Following subsequent communications and agreement on hearing dates, the Tribunal issued a Procedural Order scheduling a five-day hearing on the merits and setting out the pre-hearing timetable.

The applicant sought judicial review of two prompt payment adjudications under the Construction Act, arguing procedural unfairness.

The applicant alleged the respondent raised new reasons for non-payment not detailed in its Notices of Non-Payment and that the adjudicators unfairly denied the applicant's request to deliver reply submissions.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the adjudicators reasonably concluded the respondent merely elaborated on its original reasons, and the refusal of reply submissions accorded with the Act and the parties' agreed process.

The applicant appealed under s. 42(10) of the Planning Act seeking a determination of the cash-in-lieu of parkland required for a proposed redevelopment.

At a case management conference, the parties requested late fall dates to allow for the exchange of reports and potential mediation.

The Tribunal scheduled a three-day video hearing for November 2024 and issued a procedural order to govern the proceedings.

The claimant filed a Notice of Arbitration against the City of Toronto under the Expropriations Act for compensation following a full taking of the subject land.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal noted that the parties intend to engage in mediation.

The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference and a nine-day arbitration hearing, and directed the parties to file a draft Procedural Order.

The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the expropriation of the claimant's property.

The parties agreed to an eight-day hearing on the merits.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order setting the hearing dates and establishing the pre-hearing timeline for discoveries, expert reports, and mediation.

The City of Barrie appealed an Amended Environmental Compliance Approval issued by the Director to Laguna Trading Ltd. for a waste disposal site.

The Director brought a motion to dismiss the appeal, arguing the City had no right of appeal under s. 139 of the Environmental Protection Act and had missed the deadline to seek leave to appeal under the Environmental Bill of Rights.

The Tribunal found that the City did not have a right of appeal under s. 139, as it was not the applicant or holder of the approval.

The Tribunal also held it lacked jurisdiction to extend the mandatory 15-day deadline for seeking leave to appeal under the Environmental Bill of Rights.

The Director's failure to consider the City's comments prior to issuing the approval did not create a right of appeal.

The motion was granted and the appeal was dismissed.