28 total
Motion for unredacted legal invoices dismissed as redacted entries were irrelevant and presumptively privileged.
The defendant law firm in a solicitor's negligence action brought a motion under Rules 30.03 and 30.04 for the production of unredacted copies of the plaintiffs' legal invoices and docket entries.
The plaintiffs had redacted entries relating to advice given on the current action, claiming privilege.
The court dismissed the motion, finding that the redacted entries were not relevant to the action, were expressly excluded from the parties' discovery plan waiver, and were presumptively protected by solicitor-client and litigation privilege.
Tribunal schedules further Case Management Conference to allow parties to continue settlement discussions.
The Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals for official plan and zoning by-law amendments to permit a nine-storey mixed-use development.
The applicant reported that a settlement had been reached with one party and discussions were ongoing with others.
The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference for October 2022 and directed the parties to file a draft Procedural Order and Issues List if a comprehensive settlement is not reached.
Tribunal consolidates two zoning by-law amendment appeals for adjacent residential developments and schedules hearing dates.
The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on two zoning by-law amendment applications to permit a 38-storey and a 12-storey residential building on adjacent properties.
At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal consolidated the two proceedings as they involved the same parties and shared common elements.
Future hearing dates were scheduled, including a second Case Management Conference and a 12-day hearing on the merits.
Party status granted to tenant association but denied to broader community group in development appeal.
During a Case Management Conference for an appeal concerning a mixed-use development, an adjacent resident sought party status on behalf of two newly incorporated federal companies: Tenants Have No Rights Association and SOS Save Our City Association.
The Tribunal applied the factors from 1137528 Ontario Ltd. v Oakville (Town) and granted party status to the Tenants association, finding they had a direct interest and would be prejudiced otherwise.
The Tribunal denied party status to SOS, finding the broader community interest was already well represented by the City and other parties.
Tribunal granted party and participant status on consent and scheduled a second Case Management Conference.
At a Case Management Conference for appeals regarding the City of Toronto's failure to adopt requested official plan and zoning by-law amendments, the Tribunal considered requests for party and participant status.
The Tribunal granted party status to several entities on consent and reserved its decision on two newly formed federal corporations pending written submissions.
The Tribunal declined to set a hearing date, noting the potential for alternative dispute resolution, and scheduled a second Case Management Conference.
Tribunal addresses administrative matters and schedules second Case Management Conference for King-Parliament secondary plan appeals.
The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding 39 appeals of the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment No. 525 and associated zoning by-law amendments, which adopted a new secondary plan for the King-Parliament area.
The Tribunal addressed administrative matters including the withdrawal of certain appeals, the substitution of new property owners for existing appeals, and the splitting of an appeal.
The Tribunal also granted party status to two landowners.
A second Case Management Conference was scheduled for May 19, 2022, to establish a Procedural Order and issues list, and to allow parties time for mediation and settlement discussions.
Party status granted and seven-day hearing scheduled for zoning by-law amendment appeal.
The applicant appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal under s. 34(11) of the Planning Act due to the City's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application for a 14-storey mixed-use building.
At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to a neighbouring business concerned with compatibility.
The Tribunal scheduled a seven-day hearing and directed the parties to finalize a procedural order and issues list following an anticipated direction report from City council.
Insurer's summary judgment motion dismissed; triable issue exists regarding reasonableness of plaintiff's failure to identify hit-and-run driver.
The plaintiff was struck by an unidentified driver while riding her electric scooter in a parking lot.
The driver fled the scene shortly after the collision while the plaintiff was being attended to by her husband and a friend.
The plaintiff sued her husband's automobile insurer under the unidentified automobile coverage.
The insurer brought a motion for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to identify the driver.
The court dismissed the motion, finding a triable issue as to whether the plaintiff's failure to obtain the driver's information was reasonable given her injuries and shock immediately following the accident.
