Paul Scargall

The claimant filed a compensation claim against the Ministry of Transportation under the Expropriations Act.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference to organize the proceeding.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order submitted by the parties and scheduled a nine-day hybrid hearing to commence in March 2027.

The claimant brought a motion to compel the respondent to adhere to the Procedural Order and to amend the hearing date due to the respondent's delay in an expropriation compensation proceeding.

The respondent did not file responding materials and agreed to the requested relief, except for mandatory mediation.

The Tribunal vacated the original hearing date, scheduled a new five-day hearing for June 2025, and issued an amended Procedural Order.

The Tribunal declined to order mandatory mediation but forwarded the claimant's request to the OLT Mediation group.

Metrolinx brought motions to dismiss proceedings commenced by the claimants to have the Ontario Land Tribunal determine their costs entitlement under section 32 of the Expropriations Act.

Metrolinx argued that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to assess costs and could only fix them, asserting that the matter must be referred to an assessment officer of the Superior Court of Justice.

The Tribunal dismissed the motions, finding that it has broad and exclusive jurisdiction under the Expropriations Act and the Ontario Land Tribunal Act to determine costs.

The Tribunal held that the distinction between fixing and assessing costs does not limit its jurisdiction, and it is not bound by private settlement agreements to refer costs to an assessment officer.

Metrolinx brought motions to dismiss the claimants' proceedings for the determination of costs under section 32 of the Expropriations Act, arguing that the Ontario Land Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to assess costs and was required to refer the matter to an assessment officer of the Superior Court of Justice.

The Tribunal dismissed the motions, finding that it has broad and exclusive jurisdiction under the Expropriations Act and the Ontario Land Tribunal Act to determine costs.

The Tribunal held that its authority is not limited by any distinction between 'fixing' and 'assessing' costs, nor can a private settlement agreement oust its statutory jurisdiction.

Metrolinx brought motions challenging the jurisdiction of the Ontario Land Tribunal to determine costs under section 32 of the Expropriations Act, arguing the matter must be referred to an assessment officer of the Superior Court of Justice.

The Tribunal dismissed the motions, finding it has broad and exclusive jurisdiction under the Expropriations Act and the Ontario Land Tribunal Act to adjudicate costs disputes.

The Tribunal held that it is not bound by private settlement agreements to refer costs to an assessment officer and that determining costs internally is fair, just, expeditious, and cost-effective.

Metrolinx brought motions to dismiss the claimants' proceedings for the determination of costs under section 32 of the Expropriations Act, arguing that the Ontario Land Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to assess costs directly and was required to refer the matter to an assessment officer of the Superior Court of Justice.

The Tribunal dismissed the motions, finding that it has broad and exclusive jurisdiction under the Expropriations Act and the Ontario Land Tribunal Act to determine costs.

The Tribunal held that its discretion to refer a costs matter to an assessment officer does not fetter its authority to adjudicate costs itself, and that a private settlement agreement cannot oust the Tribunal's statutory jurisdiction.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding a claim for compensation arising from the expropriation of the claimant's lands for a Light Rail Transit System.

As the parties were not yet ready for case management and intended to discuss potential resolution, the Tribunal issued directives for future scheduling, status reporting, and the eventual submission of a draft Procedural Order.

The City of Barrie expropriated lands owned by the claimant and filed a Notice of Arbitration to determine compensation.

At the first Case Management Conference, the City sought to schedule a hearing due to ongoing prejudice from accruing interest, while the claimant's counsel required more time to obtain instructions regarding a settlement offer.

The Tribunal directed the claimant to respond by a specified date and provided instructions for scheduling a further CMC or hearing if a settlement could not be reached.