Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 9 v. SREIT (LP3A) Ltd, 2016 CanLII 47205

Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE: July 20, 2016

FILE NO.: DM 141292

Moving Party(ies): Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 9 (“MPAC”)

Respondent(s): SREIT (LP3A) Ltd c/o Morguard Corporation

Respondent(s): 500 Barmac Inc.

Property Location(s): 500 Barmac Drive

Municipality(ies): City of Toronto

Roll Number(s): 1908-013-443-00610-0000

Appeal Number(s): 2962177, 3014316, 3078652, 3069143, 3148765 and 3147734

Taxation Year(s): 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016

Hearing Event No.: 625356

Legislative Authority: Section 40 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.31, as amended

Heard: June 30, 2016 in Toronto, Ontario

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel⁺/Representative

MPAC

W. Ching

SREIT (LP3A) Ltd. c/o Morguard Corp.

A. Attard

500 Barmac Inc.

C. Francis

DISPOSITION OF THE BOARD DELIVERED BY S. LIGHT

DISPOSITION OF MOTION

1On consent of all the parties, MPAC’s motion is granted for the Respondents to provide to the Moving Party a complete copy of the Purchase and Sale Agreement between Sam Balsamo and SREIT (LP3A) Ltd. dated November 22, 2013 respecting the sale of the subject property.

2The Respondents shall produce a copy of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 environmental reports and a description of remediation costs with receipts for review by the Moving Party.

3The Respondents shall produce a copy of the 2011, 2012 and 2013 rent rolls respecting the subject property for review by the Moving Party.

4The Respondents shall produce a copy of the Co-Tenancy Agreement respecting ownership of the subject property for review by the Moving Party.

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION OF MOTION

5Pursuant to paragraph 5.9 of the Purchase Agreement, the Vendor agreed to pay the cost of the remediation program respecting the subject property and provided a right of set-off against the vendor take back mortgage respecting any out of pocket expenses the purchaser incurs in this respect if the Vendor defaults in this obligation. Therefore, details of the actual remediation costs are required in order to clarify the actual price paid for the subject property by the purchaser.

6The rent rolls should be produced since the rent rolls would permit the consideration of an income approach to valuation of the property and it would not be appropriate for the Board to restrict any approach to value at the production stage.

7The terms of the Co-Tenancy agreement are relevant to determine whether the circumstances of the sale of the subject property relied on by the Respondents meets the definition of current value and in particular the criteria that the transaction took place between unrelated parties.