Sarah Gareau

The appellant appealed five inspection orders relating to five residential properties used to house its international employees.

The Fire Safety Commission found that the properties were being operated as boarding, lodging, or rooming houses rather than single dwelling units.

The Commission confirmed the inspector's orders, finding that the living arrangements, lack of proper lighting, cooking spaces, and emergency exits posed serious fire safety risks, and amended the compliance timelines.

The appellants appealed a Review Order of the Fire Marshal upholding an inspection order that required a fire safety plan and supervisory staff for alleged care occupancy suites in a condominium.

Following case conferences, the parties resolved the dispute on consent.

The Commission amended the Review Order to rescind the disputed items and confirmed compliance with the remaining item.

The appellant appealed a conviction entered in his absence under section 9.1 of the Provincial Offences Act for an unsafe motor vehicle movement charge under section 154(1)(a) of the Highway Traffic Act.

The sole issue on appeal was whether the Certificate of Offence was complete and regular on its face, given that it contained expired short form wording that was no longer prescribed by regulation at the time of the charge.

The court held that the Certificate was complete and regular because it identified the statute, section number, and all essential elements of the offence, and the use of expired short form wording did not mislead the appellant or prejudice his defence.

The applicant filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to amend her Application, which the Tribunal granted in a prior interim decision.

The Tribunal subsequently discovered that a response from the respondent City of Kingston had been misplaced and was not considered.

Upon reviewing the misplaced response, which consented to the amendment subject to certain conditions, the Tribunal confirmed its prior order allowing the amendment, while acknowledging the respondent's caveat that it was not admitting the factual allegations.