14 total
Appeal of official plan amendment dismissed because appellant failed to make prior submissions to municipal council.
The Six Nations of the Grand River Band of Indians appealed the Minister's approval of an Official Plan Amendment (OPA 45) for lands in Kitchener.
The Tribunal initiated a motion to determine the validity of the appeal because the Six Nations had not made oral or written submissions to City Council prior to the OPA's adoption, as required by s. 17(36) of the Planning Act.
The Six Nations argued that the Minister failed to discharge the constitutional duty to consult and that the Tribunal should interpret the appeal provisions liberally.
The Tribunal found that the statutory requirement under s. 17(36) is clear and non-discretionary.
Because the Six Nations did not make the required submissions to Council, they lacked standing to appeal.
The appeal was dismissed.
The Court of Appeal upheld the finding that a mortgage broker had actual and apparent authority to receive a payout and discharge a mortgage on behalf of a bare trustee.
The appellants, Olympia Trust Company and William Loucks, appealed a motion judge's order discharging a second mortgage on property owned by the respondents.
The respondents had borrowed funds from First Swiss Mortgage Corp., which assigned the mortgage to Olympia as bare trustee.
When the respondents refinanced and paid out the mortgage to First Swiss, the discharge was never registered and First Swiss misappropriated the funds.
The motion judge found that First Swiss was acting as Olympia's agent in receiving the payout and discharging the mortgage based on the terms of agreements between First Swiss and Loucks and the course of dealings between the parties.
The Court of Appeal upheld this finding, dismissing the appeal and awarding costs to the respondents.
The court approved an interim distribution to unitholders in a securities receivership but required a full reserve for a disputed creditor claim.
This decision addresses three motions in the receivership of the Bridging Funds: (1) the Receiver’s motion for an interim distribution to unitholders, (2) approval of a settlement with the BlackRock Parties, and (3) the unitholders’ motion for a constructive trust.
The court approved the interim distribution but required a sufficient reserve for the disputed Cerieco claim until its final determination.
The BlackRock settlement was approved.
The constructive trust motion was deferred pending resolution of the Cerieco claim.
The decision provides detailed guidance on the treatment of creditor and unitholder claims in a complex receivership under the Securities Act.
Tribunal finalized issues list and scheduled 12-day merit hearing for zoning by-law amendment appeal.
The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by 2374868 Ontario Ltd. against the Township of Puslinch's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application.
The amendment sought to permit a vacuum truck soil and aggregate transfer and processing facility.
The Tribunal granted participant status to three individuals, directed revisions to the Joint Issues List to remove duplicative or non-jurisdictional wording, and scheduled a 12-day video hearing on the merits for July 2024.
Tribunal schedules second Case Management Conference to refine issues before setting 15-day merit hearing.
The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the Township's failure to make a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application.
The application sought to permit the transfer, storage, and processing of soil and aggregate materials from vacuum trucks for rehabilitation purposes.
The Tribunal deferred three participant status requests to allow counsel time to review them.
Due to the large number of anticipated expert witnesses and an unrefined issues list, the Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference to scope the issues before setting a 15-day merit hearing.
Disputed Growth Plan issue struck from Issues List because aggregate application was deemed complete in 2012.
At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals for official plan and zoning by-law amendments to permit a gravel pit expansion, the parties disputed whether an issue concerning the 2019 Growth Plan should be included on the Issues List.
The Federation of Tiny Township Shoreline Associations argued the application was substantially changed since 2012 and should be subject to the Growth Plan.
The Tribunal found that the aggregate application had been deemed complete in 2012, exempting it from the Growth Plan policies pursuant to section 4.2.8.7.
The Tribunal struck the disputed issue from the Issues List and scheduled an 11-day hearing.
Tribunal schedules further Case Management Conference and 13-day hearing for gravel pit expansion appeals.
The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant for official plan and zoning by-law amendments, and an aggregate licence referral, to permit the expansion of an existing gravel pit.
The municipality advised it had resolved its concerns and withdrew as a party.
The Tribunal scheduled a further Case Management Conference for June 9, 2022, to finalize the issues list, and set a 13-day hearing on the merits commencing January 31, 2023.
Tribunal scheduled a further telephone conference call to finalize a Procedural Order and Issues List.
This was the ninth Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the appellant concerning the failure of the township to make a decision on applications for amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and a referral under the Aggregate Resources Act.
The applications seek to permit the expansion of an existing gravel pit.
The parties resolved an issue regarding the consolidation of a related Environmental Review Tribunal matter.
The Tribunal scheduled a further telephone conference call to finalize a Procedural Order and Issues List.
Tribunal grants participant status and schedules motion to consolidate appeals regarding gravel pit expansion.
At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals for a proposed gravel pit expansion, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted participant status to two individuals on consent.
The Tribunal also substituted the Federation of Tiny Township Shoreline Associations for an individual objector.
A pending motion to consolidate an appeal regarding a permit to take water was scheduled to be heard at the next Case Management Conference.
Court establishes discovery plan in copyright dispute, ordering sample productions and equal examination time.
The plaintiffs brought an action alleging the defendants infringed their copyright in various 'Anne of Green Gables' television productions.
The parties were unable to agree on a discovery plan under Rule 29.1.
The court was asked to establish a discovery plan, specifically addressing the scope of documentary production by both sides, the production of development agreements, and the time limits for oral examinations.
The Master ordered a limited, representative sample of productions from the plaintiffs regarding the alleged infringements, reciprocal financial production on an eyes-only basis, production of the defendants' development agreements subject to redaction, and equal time (14 hours) for oral discoveries for each side.
Defendant ordered to pay $320,899.64 in full indemnity costs as her sentence for contempt.
Kristine Jill Hill was found in contempt of a June 28, 2017 order.
This endorsement addresses the sentencing, which included a joint submission, and the quantum of full indemnity costs to be paid by Ms. Hill as part of her sentence.
The court considered principles of reasonableness, indemnity, and factors under Rule 57.01 of the Courts of Justice Act.
The court found the matter complex, noted unnecessary steps taken by the defendants, and ultimately awarded the plaintiffs the requested costs of $320,899.64.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's interpretation of an RFP allowing professional services as equivalent experience.
Kaymar Rehabilitation Inc. appealed the dismissal of its action against Champlain Community Care Access Centre regarding a 2003 request for proposals for therapy services.
Kaymar challenged the trial judge's interpretation of the RFP documents, arguing that Champlain improperly allowed bidders without therapy services experience to qualify by accepting "professional services" as equivalent experience.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's interpretation, finding that the RFP documents clearly permitted such equivalents and that Kaymar had accepted these terms by bidding.
The court also addressed the costs award, reducing it from $1,864,000 to $1,675,000 on a partial indemnity basis.
Appeals of aggregate washing operation permits allowed in part to clarify conditions and require public posting of contingency plans.
The Concerned Citizens of Brant and the County of Brant appealed the issuance of a Permit to Take Water (PTTW) and an Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for an aggregate washing operation at the Dufferin Aggregates Paris Pit.
The appellants sought revisions to the conditions of both instruments to provide greater protection to the local aquifer, particularly concerning water taking volumes, monitoring requirements, and the potential for atrazine contamination.
The Environmental Review Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving several revised conditions on consent of the parties, including clarifications to water taking limits and requirements for public posting of contingency plans.
However, the Tribunal rejected the appellants' requests for extensive additional monitoring and a new science risk assessment for atrazine, finding that the aquifer was not stressed, the existing conditions were sufficiently precautionary, and there was no credible threat of atrazine contamination from the operations.
Appellants ordered to provide particulars of requested relief in environmental appeals.
The Directors and the Instrument Holder requested clarification of the remedy sought by the Appellants in their appeals of a Permit to Take Water and an Environmental Compliance Approval.
The Tribunal ordered the Appellants to provide particulars of their requested relief, including proposed wording for replacement conditions where possible, to promote an efficient and effective hearing process.
