5 total
Further Case Management Conference scheduled to allow parties to continue settlement discussions regarding official plan amendment.
Multiple appellants appealed the City of Ottawa's adoption of Official Plan Amendment No. 3.
At a Case Management Conference, the parties advised the Tribunal that settlement discussions were ongoing and requested a further CMC instead of scheduling merit hearings.
The Tribunal granted the request and scheduled a further CMC by videoconference.
Procedural order issued to govern the hearing of an appeal regarding the Orleans Corridor Secondary Plan.
The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a Procedural Order on consent of the parties to govern the proceedings for an appeal of the City of Ottawa's Official Plan Amendment No. 2023-48, which adopts the Orleans Corridor Secondary Plan.
The order sets out the organization of the hearing, requirements before the hearing, the list of parties and participants, the issues list, and the order of evidence for the hearing scheduled to commence on February 10, 2025.
Engineering consultants found liable for professional negligence and misrepresentation in managing a mining feasibility study.
The plaintiff mining company retained the defendant engineering consultants to provide a feasibility study for a proposed mineral resource development.
After nearly four years and over $3 million in expenditures, the defendants reported the resource was insufficient to proceed.
The plaintiff sued for professional negligence, breach of contract, and negligent misrepresentation, arguing the defendants should have made this determination much sooner.
The court found the defendants breached their duty of care and made negligent misrepresentations by failing to properly manage the project, verify the resource model, and communicate concerns.
The court awarded the plaintiff $1,250,000 in damages for 'unnecessary waste' and dismissed the defendants' counterclaim for unpaid fees.
Substantial indemnity costs were awarded against a plaintiff who made reckless and unfounded sexual harassment allegations against a surgeon.
Following a successful summary judgment motion dismissing the plaintiff's action, the Eckhaus Defendants sought substantial indemnity costs.
The plaintiff had made serious, unfounded allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and sexual harassment against Dr. Eckhaus.
The court found these allegations to be outrageous and reckless, justifying an award of substantial indemnity costs.
After reviewing the parties' bills of costs and considering proportionality, complexity, and importance, the court fixed the costs payable by the plaintiff to the Eckhaus Defendants at $45,645.60, inclusive of HST and disbursements.
Summary judgment granted dismissing medical negligence claim against surgeon for nurse's allegedly inappropriate intraoperative comment.
The plaintiff, a registered nurse who underwent massive weight loss, sued her plastic surgeon, his professional corporation, a hospital, and a nurse after the nurse asked an allegedly inappropriate question during surgery while the plaintiff was awake.
The surgeon and his corporation moved for summary judgment to dismiss the action against them.
The court applied the Hryniak test and reviewed the plaintiff's own expert report, which established that the surgeon met the standard of care for preoperative, technical, and postoperative care.
The court found that the surgeon also met the subjective standard of care for intraoperative management and patient advocacy, as he did not perceive the question as derogatory or know the plaintiff felt insulted at the time.
Finding no genuine issue requiring a trial, the court granted the motion and dismissed the action against the surgeon and his corporation.
