Morden J.A.

The appellants appealed a Divisional Court decision that set aside an Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) ruling.

The OMB had found that the City of Toronto's Official Plan Amendment No. 2 (OPA 2), which restricted the demolition and conversion of rental housing, was illegal and conflicted with the Tenant Protection Act.

The Court of Appeal held that while the OMB had limited jurisdiction to determine whether OPA 2 was an official plan within the meaning of the Planning Act, it erred in concluding that the City lacked the authority to enact it.

The Court found that the Planning Act permitted municipalities to include policies ensuring an adequate supply of rental housing.

Furthermore, OPA 2 did not conflict with the Tenant Protection Act, as dual compliance was possible.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario issued a supplementary endorsement amending a previous endorsement.

The appeal by the appellant Thomson was allowed, the summary judgment against him was set aside, and the motion for summary judgment was dismissed.

The court fixed the costs of the appeal at $12,000 on a partial indemnity basis and the costs of the motion below at $40,000.

The appellants appealed an order dismissing their motion under Rule 21.01(1)(a) of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

They argued that the respondents' notice under s. 284(5) of the Municipal Act was invalid as a matter of law because it contained a wrong address.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the sufficiency of the notice raises a factual issue that is not appropriately determined on a Rule 21 motion.