Jennifer Park

The offender was found guilty of arson, assault with a weapon, and making an explosive device after deliberately burning down his landlord's home and setting a secondary fire at a neighbouring property.

The fires caused catastrophic damage, completely destroying the landlord's home and causing over $200,000 in damage to the neighbour's property.

The court accepted a joint submission for a sentence of time served (629 days credit) plus one day, three years of probation, and over $330,000 in restitution, noting the offender's mental health issues, harsh pre-sentence custody conditions, and the significant restitution order as mitigating factors.

The young person pleaded guilty to voyeurism and distributing an intimate image after recording a consensual sexual encounter with a classmate and showing the video to her ex-boyfriend.

The Crown sought 18 months' probation, while the defence sought an absolute or conditional discharge.

The court analyzed the legal distinctions between a conditional discharge and probation under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, finding that a conditional discharge is a meaningfully distinct sentence with a shorter record access period.

Balancing the gravity of the offences against the young person's strong rehabilitative progress, the court imposed a conditional discharge with an 18-month term of conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals against the City of Markham's new City-wide Parkland Conveyance By-law No. 2025-101.

The parties requested Tribunal-led mediation, which was subsequently assessed and confirmed.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference for September 2026 to allow the mediation process to proceed.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval to permit a 66-storey mixed-use building.

Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement on the zoning appeal, which included revisions to the building's podium height, massing, and architectural design to better respond to the surrounding heritage context and adjacent residential buildings.

The Tribunal accepted uncontested expert planning evidence that the revised proposal is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and conforms to the Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the draft Zoning By-law Amendment in principle, and adjourned the Site Plan appeal sine die.

The applicants appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a proposed two-tower residential development.

Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement involving revised building heights, setbacks, and parkland dedication.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the revised proposal represents good planning, supports transit-oriented intensification, and is consistent with provincial and municipal policies.

The appeals were allowed in part, with the amendments approved in principle subject to final conditions.

The accused, charged with sexual assault and sexual interference, brought a Stage One application under s. 278.93 of the Criminal Code seeking to adduce a Discord message allegedly sent to him by the complainant.

The accused argued the message was not a 'record' under s. 278.1.

The court found that the message, which contained expressions of affection and a request not to share it, attracted a reasonable expectation of privacy and was therefore a non-enumerated record.

The court further held that the message was capable of being admissible as it was relevant to the complainant's credibility, and granted the application to proceed to a Stage Two hearing.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference to obtain status updates on the remaining appeals of the City of Toronto's comprehensive Zoning By-law No. 569-2013.

The Tribunal received updates on various issue-specific and site-specific appeals, noting ongoing settlement discussions.

The Tribunal directed all appellants to provide written updates to the City regarding their intentions to continue settlement discussions or provide an issues list, and scheduled a further Case Management Conference for June 2026.

The Crown applied for an order permitting a witness (the former intimate partner of the accused) to testify via closed-circuit television (CCTV) from outside the courtroom and in the company of a support person in a trial for breach of a recognizance.

The accused opposed the application, arguing that the witness should testify in-person behind a privacy screen.

The court granted the Crown's application, finding that the witness would experience psychological and physiological distress if required to testify in the presence of the accused, and that CCTV and a support person would facilitate her ability to provide full and candid testimony.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on planning applications for three mixed-use residential towers.

The Tribunal granted party status to an abutting landowner and participant status to a neighbouring property owner.

A nine-day hearing was scheduled for March 2026, and the parties were directed to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on official plan and zoning by-law amendment applications for a proposed 35 and 39-storey residential development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status on consent to an adjacent developer and two neighbouring property owners, and participant status to supportive property owners across the street.

The Tribunal scheduled a nine-day merit hearing for February 2026 and directed the parties to finalize a procedural order and issues list.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the respondent's failure to make decisions on Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval applications for a proposed 65-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal finalized the Procedural Order, approved the issues list, and scheduled a 9-day video hearing for February 2026.

The moving party sought leave to appeal a decision of the Ontario Land Tribunal dated November 1, 2024.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal.

Pursuant to joint submissions, the moving party was ordered to pay costs of $10,000 to the responding party.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals from the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an Official Plan Amendment application for the Centrepoint Mall site, and appeals of the City-initiated Yonge Street North Secondary Plan (OPA 615).

The Tribunal granted party status to the City of Vaughan without objection.

The parties agreed to schedule a 10-day merit hearing and submitted a draft Procedural Order, which the Tribunal approved and appended to its decision.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicants against the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on an Official Plan Amendment application.

The Tribunal granted party status to the City of Vaughan without objection.

The parties agreed to finalize a Procedural Order and schedule a 10-day merit hearing commencing in April 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued an amending decision to correct typographical errors in a previous decision and order dated December 23, 2024.

The corrections included the spelling of counsel names and a site name.

The amendment was made pursuant to Rule 24.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Multiple parties appealed the City of Toronto's adoption of Official Plan Amendment 615, which implements the Yonge Street North Secondary Plan.

Prior to the hearing, the City and several appellants reached a settlement modifying the OPA to prioritize the public realm, encourage diverse land uses, and support higher-order transit.

Relying on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the modified OPA 615 represents good land use planning and approved it in principle, save for several site-specific 'hived-off' appeals that will proceed separately.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal of the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 69-storey residential building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a neighbouring resident on consent.

The Tribunal also approved the parties' draft Procedural Order and scheduled an eight-day video hearing to commence in June 2025.

This was the first Case Management Conference regarding multiple appeals of the Region of Peel's approval of Official Plan Amendments 142, 143, and 144 to the City of Mississauga's Official Plan, which relate to Major Transit Station Areas.

The Tribunal granted Observing Party status to the Region of Peel, Non-Appellant Party status to Hensall Holdings and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, and Participant status to Trillium Health Partners.

A motion by the City to confirm the scope of the appeals and bring unappealed portions of the OPAs into effect was adjourned to allow the parties time to review a revised draft order and compendium.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Blue Birch Properties Inc. against the Town of the Blue Mountains for failing to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The applicant sought to rezone the subject lands to redefine wetland and hazard zones and establish two development envelopes.

At the request of the parties, who required more time to resolve issues following a revised development proposal, the Tribunal scheduled a third Case Management Conference for September 6, 2024, to facilitate a potential settlement.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval to permit a mixed-use development.

Following a settlement between the parties, the proposal was revised to include a 58-storey building and a 12-storey building, addressing concerns regarding height, massing, and heritage conservation.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with provincial policies and the City's Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment in principle and withholding its final order pending the satisfaction of several conditions.