Jessica Rosenberg

The appellant appealed a Director's Order requiring it to take steps regarding street sweepings delivered to various properties.

The parties reached a proposed settlement agreement with a Terms of Reference for assessing and addressing contaminants, but the appellant would not withdraw its appeal until the measures were completed.

The Tribunal declined to approve the Proposed Minutes of Settlement as a partial settlement is not contemplated by its Rules of Practice, but accepted the process and adjourned the appeal to allow the parties to carry out the work.

The Crown appealed a sentence imposed on a winery corporation that pleaded guilty to discharging material into a watercourse in violation of the Ontario Water Resources Act.

The trial judge imposed a fine of $600, invoking section 59(2) of the Provincial Offences Act to relieve the defendant from the statutory minimum fine of $25,000.

The appeal judge increased the fine to $5,000, still below the minimum.

The Court of Appeal allowed the Crown's appeal and imposed the minimum fine of $25,000, holding that section 59(2) must be applied with appropriate restraint to avoid undermining the deterrent purpose of minimum fines in public welfare legislation.

The appellants appealed a decision of the Environmental Review Tribunal upholding a Director's order under s. 18 of the Environmental Protection Act.

The order required the appellants, as owners or former owners/occupiers of a contaminated source property, to delineate contamination that had migrated to off-site properties.

The appellants argued s. 18 was limited to future events and on-site remediation, contrasting it with the fault-based s. 17.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Tribunal's broad interpretation of s. 18—that it permits off-site orders and applies to existing, ongoing, and future adverse effects—was reasonable and consistent with the modern principles of statutory interpretation.

Quantex Technologies Inc. and Marco Dalla-Nora pleaded guilty to three counts under the Environmental Protection Act: two counts relating to improper waste manifesting and transfer of hazardous waste without proper notice, and one count relating to air emissions causing discomfort.

The Crown and defence reached a joint submission on penalty.

The court imposed total fines of $140,000 plus victim fine surcharges and a 15-month probation order with unique conditions including a prohibition on bulking hazardous wastes for six months and the installation of an embedded auditor.

All remaining charges were withdrawn.

The court commended both parties for the innovative use of an embedded auditor as a rehabilitative tool.

The appellant appealed conditions of a Permit to Take Water issued for its golf course, which required the installation of nested bedrock monitoring wells.

Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement agreement to amend the permit conditions, requiring the conversion of an existing well into a multi-level observation well and shortening the permit duration to two years to gather data.

The Tribunal found the settlement consistent with the purpose of the Ontario Water Resources Act and in the public interest, ordered the Director to issue the amended permit, and dismissed the appeal.

The appellants sought to appeal a Provincial Officer's Order issued under the Environmental Protection Act.

The Director requested the appeals be dismissed without a hearing, arguing the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the appellants failed to request a review of the order by the Director within the statutory seven-day limit.

The Tribunal agreed, finding that under s. 140 of the Act, an appeal only lies from a Director's order.

Since no review was requested, no Director's order was made or deemed made.

The appeals were dismissed pursuant to Rule 119 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice.

The appellant appealed conditions of a Permit to Take Water requiring the installation of a nested bedrock monitoring well at its golf course.

Following unsuccessful mediation, the parties requested that the Tribunal set dates for a hearing.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order setting the hearing dates, establishing a schedule for document disclosure and witness statements, and determining the order of evidence presentation.

The appellant appealed the Director's refusal to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval for a hauled sewage disposal site.

Following mediation, the parties reached a tentative settlement.

The Tribunal issued a procedural order scheduling a one-day hearing to review the settlement agreement and hear from participants, and set deadlines for filing materials.

At a pre-hearing conference regarding an appeal of the Director's refusal to issue an Environmental Compliance Approval for a hauled sewage disposal site, the Tribunal considered requests for party and participant status.

The Township of Algonquin Highlands was granted party status.

Several individuals and a property owners' association were granted participant status, while one individual's request was deferred as she intended to be a witness.

The Tribunal also set a schedule for mediation and the hearing.

The appellant appealed conditions of a Permit to Take Water requiring the installation of a nested bedrock monitoring well.

At a pre-hearing conference, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo requested participant status, arguing it had an interest in monitoring the aquifer which serves as its source of drinking water.

The Tribunal granted participant status to the Region on consent and set a schedule for document disclosure and mediation.

The appellants appealed an order issued by the Director of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change requiring them to delineate off-site contamination.

After an unsuccessful jurisdictional motion, the appellants withdrew their remaining grounds of appeal on the basis that the order's requirements had been or would be substantially complied with.

The Director consented to the withdrawal.

The Environmental Review Tribunal dismissed the appeals pursuant to Rule 199 of its Rules of Practice.

The appellant appealed an Amended Environmental Compliance Approval regarding the management of ammonia and ammonium in an on-site stormwater management pond.

The parties reached a settlement and submitted Minutes of Settlement to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal found the settlement consistent with the Environmental Protection Act and in the public interest.

The Tribunal directed the issuance of the draft Amended ECA and dismissed the appeal.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order requiring the removal of waste ash from a church property.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement agreement that varied the compliance dates for the removal of the waste ash and required interim monitoring and capping.

The Environmental Review Tribunal accepted the settlement agreement, finding it consistent with the purpose of the Environmental Protection Act and in the public interest.

The Tribunal directed the amendment of the Director's Order and dismissed the appeals.