7 total
Tribunal clarified parking setback in prior decision and set deadlines for survey production.
The Ontario Land Tribunal held a telephone conference call to clarify its previous decision regarding a zoning by-law amendment for a waterfront property in the Township of Muskoka Lakes.
The Tribunal amended a paragraph in its prior decision to clarify that a parking area may be positioned 'to within 50 feet of the lake'.
The Tribunal also directed the appellants to provide an existing plan of survey and set a deadline for the parties to provide an update and propose timelines for further deliverables.
Committal for second degree murder quashed and replaced with manslaughter due to lack of evidence of subjective foresight of murder.
The applicant sought certiorari to quash his committal to stand trial on charges including second degree murder, arising from a stabbing during a drug deal turned robbery.
The preliminary inquiry justice had committed the applicant for murder based on the combined operation of s. 229(c) and s. 21(2) of the Criminal Code.
The reviewing court found this was a jurisdictional error, as there was no evidence the applicant had subjective foresight that an intentional murder was likely to be committed.
The committal for second degree murder was quashed and replaced with manslaughter, while committals on remaining drug and weapons charges were upheld.
Tenant ordered to pay $250 for breaching settlement agreement by sending disparaging letter about property manager.
The applicant housing corporation filed an application alleging the respondent tenant breached a prior human rights settlement by sending a disparaging letter about the property manager to the board of directors.
The Tribunal found that the settlement's non-disparagement and respectful communication clauses applied to communications between the parties, and the letter constituted a breach.
Although the applicant sought $2,500 in damages primarily for legal costs, the Tribunal noted it lacks jurisdiction to award legal costs.
Given the respondent's subsequent apology and retraction, the Tribunal awarded $250 in damages for the breach.
Tribunal dismissed untimely allegations and adjourned hearing for parties to file relevant documents.
The applicant alleged discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.
The respondent requested that parts of the Application be dismissed as untimely, as they referred to events occurring more than one year prior to filing.
During a case conference, the applicant confirmed she was only proceeding with allegations that occurred on or after April 20, 2014.
The Tribunal dismissed the parts of the Application involving incidents prior to that date.
The Tribunal also adjourned the hearing to allow the parties to serve and file documents and witness statements relevant to the narrowed issues.
Applicant ordered to disclose relevant documents and confirm Reply materials or face dismissal.
The respondent requested an order requiring the applicant to comply with document disclosure rules and file a Reply.
The Tribunal noted the applicant had filed materials intended as a Reply but missed the deadline for the formal form.
The Tribunal ordered the applicant to confirm her Reply materials and to disclose all relevant documents within 14 days, warning that failure to comply could result in the application being dismissed as abandoned.
Request to remove personal respondents granted as alleged conduct occurred within scope of employment.
The respondents brought a Request for Order During Proceedings to remove the named personal respondents from the human rights application.
The applicant consented to the removal of all personal respondents except for one former executive.
Applying the Persaud factors, the Tribunal found that the remaining personal respondent's alleged conduct occurred within the scope of her employment duties, the corporate respondent was capable of responding to the allegations, and there was no compelling reason to retain her as a party.
The request was granted and all personal respondents were removed.
Teacher's certificate revoked following criminal convictions for sexual offences against minors.
The Ontario College of Teachers brought professional misconduct allegations against a member who had been convicted of multiple criminal offences, including gross indecency, indecent assault, and sexual assault against minors.
The member pleaded no contest to the allegations.
The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct based on the criminal convictions.
The Committee ordered the revocation of the member's teaching certificate and directed that the decision be published with the member's name, emphasizing the need for specific and general deterrence and the protection of students.