R. Gill

The accused was charged with criminal negligence causing death and bodily harm after a fatal head-on collision on Highway 17.

The accused attempted to pass a line of slow-moving traffic in treacherous winter conditions, driving in the oncoming lane up a hill where the centre lines were obscured by snow.

He collided with an oncoming vehicle, resulting in the deaths of two children and serious injuries to their mother.

The court found that while the accused's decision to pass in such conditions was a marked departure from the standard of care, it did not amount to the marked and substantial departure required for criminal negligence.

The accused was found guilty of the included offences of dangerous driving causing death and bodily harm.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit three new apartment buildings on the subject lands.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontroverted planning evidence, the Tribunal found the proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, conforms to the City Official Plan, and represents good land use planning for an infill development within a Major Transit Station Area.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part on an interim basis, withholding its final order until the final form of the by-law and other conditions are satisfied.

The City of Toronto appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision approving seven variances to permit the construction of a new two-storey detached house at 23 Beechwood Avenue.

The variances related to building length, depth, height, and setbacks.

The Toronto Local Appeal Body dismissed the appeal and confirmed the approval of the variances, finding that they met the four tests under section 45(1) of the Planning Act.

The tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's land use planner, concluding that the proposed house would respect and reinforce the physical character of the neighbourhood, which includes large, irregularly shaped ravine lots, and that the variances were minor in nature with little to no negative impact on neighbours.

This decision addresses the charge of criminal harassment under section 264(2)(d) of the Criminal Code, specifically focusing on whether the creation and content of a website by the accused, Mahyar Radmehr, constituted threatening conduct causing the complainant, Ms. K., to reasonably fear for her safety.

The Court found that while the website caused embarrassment, anxiety, and frustration to Ms. K., it was not designed as a tool of intimidation to instill fear.

The Crown failed to prove the offence beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in an acquittal.

The Court also declined to impose a common law peace bond requested by the Crown, finding no reasonable fear to justify such an order.

The City of Toronto brought a motion seeking to confirm the unappealed portions of Official Plan Amendment No. 499 (Golden Mile Secondary Plan), approve proposed modifications, and adjourn remaining site-specific appeals.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontested land use planning evidence that the modifications represent good planning and are consistent with provincial policies.

The Tribunal approved the modifications, confirmed the unappealed portions, and granted the requested adjournments on consent of the parties.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto Committee of Adjustment's refusal of minor variances for a new detached dwelling.

At the outset of the hearing, counsel for the appellant requested an adjournment due to a scheduling conflict with another tribunal matter, and requested that the hearing be scheduled for two days instead of one.

All parties consented to the request.

The Toronto Local Appeal Body granted the adjournment, finding it would not prejudice the parties and that two days were necessary given the number of parties and expert witnesses.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Spire Properties Ltd. for the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 24-storey mixed-use building.

The parties reported productive strides in narrowing the issues but requested more time.

On consent, the Tribunal scheduled a fourth Case Management Conference to allow the parties to continue settlement discussions and further scope the issues list.

The Tribunal held a settlement hearing regarding multiple appeals of the City of Toronto's by-law designating the King-Spadina Heritage Conservation District and adopting its associated Plan.

Based on the uncontested expert evidence of a heritage planner and a land use planner, the Tribunal found that the modified Plan satisfies the requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act and the Planning Act, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, and conforms to the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan.

The Tribunal approved the designation of the HCD and the modified Plan, allowing the appeals in part to implement the settlement.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on applications for a zoning by-law amendment and site plan approval for a 13-storey mixed-use development.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

Based on uncontested expert planning evidence, the Tribunal found the settlement consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan and the City's Official Plan.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part on an interim basis, approving the zoning by-law amendment in principle, and withheld its final order pending the satisfaction of several conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a first Case Management Conference regarding appeals by Centennial Hotels Limited against the City of Toronto's failure to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a proposed 71-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted party status to Dream Office (GP) Inc., Canada Life Assurance Company, and the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood Association.

The parties indicated they are pursuing private mediation, and a second Case Management Conference was scheduled for June 2024.

The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality for failing to make decisions on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 35-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to two additional parties on consent.

The parties advised they were engaging in private mediation.

The Tribunal approved the final draft Procedural Order and Issues List, and confirmed the 7-day video hearing scheduled to commence on February 28, 2024.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding appeals by the applicant for the failure of the City of Mississauga to adopt a requested official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment to permit a 38-storey mixed-use tower.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a neighbouring developer on consent.

A 15-day hearing was scheduled to commence on May 6, 2024, and the parties were directed to finalize the procedural order.

The appellant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on official plan and zoning by-law amendments to permit a 12-storey residential building.

The parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal approved the settlement in principle, finding it consistent with the PPS, conforming to the Growth Plan and City OP, and representing good planning.

The final order is withheld pending the satisfaction of conditions.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the applicant against the City of Toronto for failing to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for a 35-storey mixed-use building.

The Tribunal granted participant status to several individuals and a residents' association.

A second Case Management Conference and a 7-day hearing on the merits were scheduled.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by the Rotary Club of Brampton Glen Community Centre against the City of Brampton's refusal of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications.

The applications propose two residential apartment buildings of 12 and 14 storeys.

The Tribunal granted participant status to an adjacent landowner and party status to another abutting landowner.

A 7-day merit hearing was scheduled for April 2024.

The Appellants appealed the City of Mississauga's failure to render a decision on their applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment within the statutory timeframe.

The applications seek to permit a five-tower mixed-use development.

At the first Case Management Conference, the Tribunal granted party status to the Region of Peel and Metrolinx on consent.

The Tribunal directed the parties to submit a draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a second Case Management Conference.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding claims for compensation arising from expropriations at Union Station by Metrolinx.

The claimants, Osmington (Union Station) Inc. and the City of Toronto, and the respondent, Metrolinx, provided updates on pleadings and mediation efforts.

The Tribunal scheduled a second Case Management Conference, directed the parties to prepare a draft Procedural Order, and suggested the creation of a common visual evidence book to assist in mediation or a hearing on the merits.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference regarding appeals by the applicant against the municipality's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications for a 39-storey tower.

The Tribunal approved the draft Procedural Order and Issues List and scheduled a seven-day video hearing to commence on May 15, 2024.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals for official plan and zoning by-law amendments and a draft plan of subdivision, the Tribunal considered requests for party status.

The Tribunal granted party status on consent to the corporate owners of a nearby property.

The Tribunal denied party status to individual nearby property owners who could not specify how the development would impact their interests, granting them participant status instead.

The Tribunal declined the appellant's request to schedule hearing dates due to the lack of an issues list and scheduled a third Case Management Conference.

The Tribunal convened a second Case Management Conference regarding an appeal against the City of Toronto for failing to make a decision on a Zoning By-law Amendment application.

The application proposed a 20-storey mixed-use development.

The Tribunal scheduled an eight-day merits hearing and approved the draft Procedural Order submitted by the parties.