Shaun O'Brien

The moving party, a neighbourhood association, sought leave to appeal a decision of the Ontario Land Tribunal regarding a development application.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal without providing reasons, consistent with its usual practice.

On the issue of costs, the court rejected the moving party's argument that it was a public interest litigant, noting it was directly impacted by the development.

However, recognizing the association's lack of assets, the court reduced the requested costs of $32,272.16 and ordered the moving party to pay $10,000 to the responding developers.

The court also directed the Registrar to issue a notice under Rule 2.1 regarding the related application for judicial review.

The appellant, a not-for-profit organization operating a student residence, appealed an Assessment Review Board decision classifying its property as Multi-Residential rather than Residential.

The appellant argued the Board erred in law by focusing exclusively on the physical layout of the suites rather than the occupancy arrangements to determine if they were 'self-contained units'.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board correctly considered both the physical layout and the occupancy arrangements, and that the Board's application of these factors was a question of mixed fact and law not subject to appellate review.