Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE: June 04, 2020

FILE NO.: DM 164994

Moving Party(ies): Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Region 18

Respondent(s): 337304 Ontario Limited

Respondent(s): City of Niagara Falls

Property Location(s): 6526 Main Street

Municipality(ies): City of Niagara Falls

Roll Number(s): 2725-030-008-12000-0000

Appeal Number(s): 3165655, 3243967, 3301894, 3309246, 3363099, 3363101, 3407937 and 3407970

Taxation Year(s): 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020

Hearing Event No.: 728874

Legislative Authority: Rule 24(e) of the Assessment Review Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure

Parties	Counsel*/Representative
337304 Ontario Limited	John Koutres
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation	Douglas Keyes
City of Niagara Falls	No one appeared

REQUEST FOR: Dismissal of Appeals 3165655, 3243967, 3301894, 3309246, 3363099 and 3363101

HEARD: February 18, 2020 in writing

ADJUDICATOR(S): Maureen Helt, Acting Associate Chair

MOTION DECISION

OVERVIEW

1The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) seeks to have appeal numbers 3165655, 3243967, 3301894, 3309246, 3363099 and 3363101 (the “Appeals”) dismissed as 337304 Ontario Limited (the “Appellant”) failed to file a Statement of Issues which was to be served by February 11, 2019.

Background

2On December 5, 2019, MPAC filed a Request to Dismiss the Appeals submitting that the Appellant failed to deliver a Statement of Issues for the Appeals as required under Rule 24(e) of the Assessment Review Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (the “Rules”). In response, the Appellant filed a letter dated December 15, 2019 stating that the Appeals ought not to be dismissed as MPAC “failed to schedule a hearing for the appeals”.

3By way of letter dated December 23, 2019 the Board advised the parties of MPAC’s request for dismissal and advised the Appellant and the Municipality that they could make submissions with the Board in response to MPAC’s request. MPAC was also given a further opportunity to make submissions. Both the Appellant and MPAC filed submissions. No submissions were received from the Municipality.

Result

4For the reasons that follow, the Appeals are dismissed for non-compliance with the Rules.

ANALYSIS

5The Board’s Rules clearly establish that appeals can be dismissed should a party fail to comply with the timelines set out in the Schedule of Events. In this case, the Appellant failed to deliver its Statement of Issues on the due date of February 11, 2019.

6MPAC references the Board’s decision in Spinelli v Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Region 15, 2020 CanLII 1390 (ONARB) wherein the Board found the appellant breached Rule 24(e) for failing to provide a statement of issues as required.

7To date, no Statement of Issues has been served by the Appellant and the Appellant is in default of the Schedule of Events timelines by over one year.

CONCLUSION

8MPAC’s motion to dismiss the Appeals is granted. The Appellant failed to serve its Statement of Issues and failed to file any material in this motion to dismiss other than its letter dated December 15, 2019 stating that the Appeals ought not to be dismissed as MPAC “failed to schedule a hearing for the appeals”. The Appellant provides no explanation for its failure to file its Statement of Issues.

9The Board finds the requirements of Rule 24(e) have been met and that dismissal is warranted.

ORDER

10The Board orders that appeal numbers 3165655, 3243967, 3301894, 3309246 (Duplicate), 3363099 and 3363101 are dismissed. Pursuant to s. 40(26) of the Act, the Appellant is deemed to have brought the same appeal in respect of the 2020 taxation year. This decision also applies to the deemed 2020 taxation year appeals.