Will Bartlett

The appellants appealed the Engineer's Report for the repair and improvement of the Esseltine Drain under sections 48 and 54(1) of the Drainage Act.

The appellants, who own agricultural properties, argued that the proposed drainage works provided no benefit to their lands and that their assessments were disproportionately high compared to the urban and greenhouse developments contributing to the increased water flow and erosion.

The Tribunal accepted the evidence of the respondent municipality's engineers, finding that the assessments were calculated using standard methodologies and were fair and reasonable.

The Tribunal concluded there was no evidence to support modifying the Engineer's Report or the assessments, and dismissed the appeals.

The appellants appealed the decision of the Court of Revision confirming the engineer's report and assessments for the Stefanik Drain.

The appellants argued that they were riparian owners on a natural watercourse and therefore should not be assessed for outlet liability.

The Tribunal conducted a site view and concluded that the channel in question was not a natural watercourse with riparian rights, but rather a swale used as an outlet for tile drainage.

The Tribunal found that the proposed drain provided a legal outlet for the upper properties, justifying an outlet assessment.

However, the Tribunal adjusted the assessment ratio, determining that the main purpose of the work was to reclaim land on the lower property, and modified the schedule of assessment accordingly.