Lauren Wortsman

The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal the decision of the lower court.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and ordered the moving party to pay costs of $7,500 to the responding party.

The plaintiff, a logging cooperative holding a sustainable forest licence, sought an interlocutory injunction to prevent the defendants from blockading access to a harvesting area on Crown land.

The responding party, a member of the local First Nation, opposed the injunction, arguing insufficient consultation under s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

The court granted the injunction, finding that the plaintiff met the RJR MacDonald test and that raising the duty to consult as a defence to an injunction, rather than pursuing legal challenges against the Crown, constituted an abuse of process.

The applicant appealed the City of Hamilton's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment and draft plan of subdivision to permit an 18-lot residential subdivision on vacant agricultural lands.

The City and an adjacent industrial rendering facility opposed the development, arguing it would create land use conflicts due to noise and odour emissions, contrary to provincial guidelines.

The Tribunal accepted the applicant's expert evidence that noise and odour impacts could be adequately mitigated through sound barriers, air conditioning, and existing facility controls.

The Tribunal found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the Rural Hamilton Official Plan, allowing the appeals in part on an interim basis.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order to govern the hearing of appeals by 1376412 Ontario Ltd. (Zeina Homes) against the City of Hamilton's refusal of applications to amend the Zoning By-law and for a proposed Plan of Subdivision.

The applications seek to permit an 18-lot subdivision and a stormwater management facility block.

The procedural order sets out the organization of the hearing, requirements before the hearing, the parties and participants, the issues list, the order of evidence, and a summary of filing dates.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the City's refusal of a Zoning By-law Amendment and proposed Plan of Subdivision for an 18-lot residential development.

The Tribunal granted Party status to an adjacent industrial operator.

The Tribunal also provided directions to the parties to finalize the Procedural Order and Issues List.

The appellant appealed conditions in an Amended Environmental Compliance Approval relating to odour emissions from its animal by-product processing plant.

The parties reached a settlement to replace a mandatory odour performance limit with an odour objective, requiring comprehensive updates to the Odour Management Plan and continuous improvement measures.

The Ontario Land Tribunal approved the settlement, finding that the proposed amendments satisfy the statutory requirements of the Environmental Protection Act and are in the public interest.

The applicant sought leave to appeal the Director's decision to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for a metal recycling facility, raising concerns about noise and air emissions from a metal shredder.

The applicant argued that the decision was unreasonable because an acoustic audit should have been required prior to issuance, the ECA conflicted with the Fire Code, and the facility was not authorized under municipal planning requirements.

The Ontario Land Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case that the Director's decision was unreasonable.

The Tribunal held that the Director properly considered the applicable regulatory and policy requirements, that requiring an acoustic audit after the ECA's issuance was consistent with Ministry practice, and that the Director was not required to resolve Fire Code or municipal planning issues before issuing the ECA.

The appellant appealed conditions of an amended Environmental Compliance Approval regarding odour limits at its rendering plant.

The parties could not agree on the wording of certain issues for the Issues List.

The Tribunal adopted the Director's proposed wording for three issues and revised a fourth, finding that the issues must focus on the specific facility and approval rather than general scientific declarations.

The Tribunal also granted a consent request to extend the compliance deadline for odour limits to October 1, 2022, given the hearing schedule.

The appellant appealed specific conditions imposed under an Amended Environmental Compliance Approval relating to an animal by-product processing plant.

At a pre-hearing conference, the Tribunal granted Presenter status to three entities, approved a partial settlement resulting in the withdrawal of part of the appeal, and directed the Director to amend the ECA accordingly.

A further pre-hearing conference was scheduled to allow the parties to pursue settlement discussions on the remaining issues.