Frank Joseph Sperduti

The Regional Municipality of York appealed an Ontario Land Tribunal decision awarding approximately $2.4 million in compensation to a landowner for the expropriation of a vacant lot.

The appellant argued the Tribunal erred by failing to screen out the expropriation scheme's effect on the property's value under s. 14(4)(b) of the Expropriations Act, and by improperly assessing the risk of land dedications.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no legal error in the Tribunal's application of the Pointe Gourde principle and concluding that the Tribunal's factual findings regarding land dedications were entitled to deference.

The City of Toronto expropriated a property owned by the Multanis.

Dramel Limited and other entities held charges against the property.

Dramel brought a motion to determine its priority rights to a section 25 settlement offer made by the City.

At a Case Management Conference, the Tribunal adjourned Dramel's motion to proceed in writing and issued a Procedural Order to govern the future conduct of the compensation hearing, despite the original owners' ongoing difficulties in retaining legal counsel.

The proposed intervenors, three regional municipalities, brought a motion for leave to intervene as friends of the court in an appeal regarding compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The underlying appeal involved a private dispute between an expropriating authority and a landowner over the market value of expropriated land.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion, finding that the proposed intervenors failed to demonstrate they would make a useful and distinct contribution not already offered by the appellant.

The court noted that the intervention would unnecessarily broaden and complicate the private dispute by introducing issues related to the capital planning of other municipalities.

Following a decision ordering a rehearing on compensation for an expropriated property, the Tribunal held a case management conference to determine the scope of the rehearing.

The claimants argued that the rehearing should include the issue of highest and best use, while the respondent city argued the Tribunal was functus officio on that issue.

The Tribunal rejected the city's argument, finding that it retained broad discretionary authority under the Ontario Land Tribunal Act and its Rules to conduct a full or partial rehearing.

The Tribunal ordered that the rehearing include written and oral evidence concerning the highest and best use of the subject property to ensure a fair, just, and expeditious resolution.

The City of Ottawa brought a Request for Review of an Ontario Land Tribunal decision determining compensation for an expropriated property.

The City alleged the Tribunal made material errors in calculating market value by conflating Gross Building Area (GBA) with Gross Floor Area (GFA).

The Tribunal found that the requested changes were substantive and could not be corrected as minor errors under Rule 24.4.

However, applying Rule 25.7(c), the Tribunal concluded that the conflation of GBA and GFA, misstatements of evidence, and resulting confusion constituted a convincing and compelling case that an error was made such that a different decision would likely have been reached.

The Tribunal ordered a partial rehearing limited to the issue of market value, treating the original findings on highest and best use and environmental remediation costs as agreed.

The claimant in an expropriation compensation proceeding brought an unopposed motion for a confidentiality order under Rule 22.2 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Rules.

The claimant sought to protect its own sensitive financial and business information, as well as proprietary market data obtained from a non-party data provider, Kalibrate Canada Inc. The Tribunal found that the information involved intimate financial matters whose protection outweighed the public interest in open proceedings.

The motion was granted and the confidentiality order issued.

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 Regional Municipality of York brought a motion for directions seeking an order requiring the Claimant to deliver an itemized Schedule B to its Affidavit of Documents in an expropriation proceeding.

The Claimant argued that the requested documents were not relevant to determining when the injurious affection claim became known under s. 22(1) of the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal held that it was premature to adjudicate the relevance of the documents to the s. 22(1) issue or any claims of privilege, and ordered the Claimant to provide a detailed Schedule B in compliance with Rule 30.03 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

The claimants brought a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the City of Vaughan's acquisition of portions of their properties for the Kirby Road Extension Project.

At the first Case Management Conference, the parties agreed to engage in Tribunal-assisted mediation.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference to allow time for mediation and directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order prior to the next event.

The City of Ottawa expropriated the claimants' property for the Stage 2 Light Rail Transit project.

The parties disputed the highest and best use and market value of the property.

The claimants argued for a high-density two-tower development valued at $13.2 million, while the City argued for a lower-density development valued at $5.48 million.

The Tribunal found that the claimants' proposal was not legally permissible or financially feasible and failed to screen out the influence of the LRT scheme as required by the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal determined the highest and best use was a single 17-storey tower and set the market value at $8,053,290, less a $269,000 deduction for environmental remediation costs, resulting in a total compensation award of $7,784,290.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an expropriation claim by Orlando Corporation against the Regional Municipality of York.

The parties submitted a draft Procedural Order on consent.

The Tribunal approved the Procedural Order and scheduled a four-day video hearing on the merits for February 2025.

The claimant sought compensation of approximately $2,720,000 for business losses arising from the expropriation of interests in its fuel station and convenience store property by the respondent municipality.

The parties had previously resolved compensation for the taking of the land.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference and issued a procedural order setting a five-day merit hearing for March 2025 and establishing dates for pleadings, discoveries, and the exchange of expert reports.

The City of Toronto sought to expropriate fee simple interests and temporary easements from a condominium corporation to construct elevators at the Old Mill Subway Station.

The condominium corporation requested an inquiry under section 7 of the Expropriations Act, objecting to the use of its breezeway for heavy construction vehicle access due to concerns about the structural stability of its underground parking garage roof and safety risks.

The Tribunal considered competing expert evidence on the garage's weight-bearing capacity and evaluated alternative access routes.

The Tribunal concluded that the proposed takings were fair, sound, and reasonably necessary to achieve the objective of improving transit accessibility, finding the alternatives unsatisfactory.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order to govern the proceedings leading up to and including a 10-day video hearing scheduled to commence on January 13, 2025, regarding an expropriation arbitration between 2090396 Ontario Limited and the Regional Municipality of York.

The parties previously settled an expropriation claim, with the respondent agreeing to pay the claimant's reasonable costs under section 32 of the Expropriations Act.

The claimant subsequently failed to respond to communications regarding the resolution of costs and did not appear at the scheduled case management conference.

The Tribunal scheduled a further case management conference and noted that the respondent could bring a written motion if it wished to seek an order directing payment of costs directly to the claimant's law firms and experts.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent to govern the proceedings for a compensation hearing under the Expropriations Act.

The hearing is scheduled for five days commencing April 7, 2025.

The order sets out deadlines for documentary discovery, witness statements, expert reports, and other pre-hearing requirements.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation arising from the expropriation of a commercial property for the Eglinton Crosstown LRT project.

The Tribunal issued a Procedural Order, set a 14-day hearing on the merits for November 2024, and established pre-hearing timelines for discovery, expert reports, and witness statements.

The claimant brought a motion seeking answers to undertakings and questions refused by the respondent during examinations for discovery in an expropriation proceeding.

The Ontario Land Tribunal applied the Rules of Civil Procedure regarding relevancy and proportionality to assess the disputed questions.

The Tribunal found that questions relating to the 'Issue of Frontage', 'Issue of Dedication', and 'Compatibility Issue' were relevant to the pleadings, while questions regarding 'Differential Treatment' and prior negotiations were not.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to answer specific relevant questions and directed the parties to amend the procedural order.

A case management conference was held to address procedural matters and set a hearing date for an arbitration under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal reviewed and approved a draft Procedural Order and Issues List submitted by the parties.

A five-day video hearing was scheduled for June 2024, and the Procedural Order was appended to govern all further pre-hearing requirements.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct technical and typographical errors in its previous decision dated July 17, 2023, pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The amendments corrected the name of Claimant 1 in the Title of Proceedings and revised a paragraph to order the City of Toronto to produce all documents 30 days before September 25, 2023.

In all other respects, the original decision remained unchanged.