Tribunals Ontario / Tribunaux décisionnels Ontario
Assessment Review Board / Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière
ISSUE DATE: May 5, 2022
FILE NO.: DM 178294
Assessed Person(s): Calloway Reit (Hamilton Mountain) Inc.
Appellant(s): SmartCentres; Michael Genova, Walmart Canada Corp.
Respondent(s): Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Region 19
Respondent(s): City of Hamilton
Property Location(s): 675 Upper James Street
Municipality(ies): City of Hamilton
Roll Number(s): 2518-080-891-00720-0000
Appeal Number(s): 3323457, 3324864, 3323458, 3324865, 3287716, 3364138, 3364046, 3363585, 3408367, 3408365, 3447176, 3447175 3489690 and 3489580
Taxation Year(s): 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022
Hearing Event No.: 764568
Legislative Authority: Sections 33 and 40 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.31
Parties and Counsel*/Representative
SmartCentres Submissions not received
Walmart Canada Corp. Submissions not received
Calloway Reit (Hamilton Mountain) Inc. Submissions not received
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Submissions not received
City of Hamilton John O’Kane*
REQUEST FOR: Amendment to the Schedule of Events
HEARD: April 28, 2022 in writing
ADJUDICATOR(S): Carly Stringer, Member
MOTION DECISION
REASONS
1Smartcentres (the “Appellant”) filed an Expedited Board Direction Form asking the Assessment Review Board (the “Board”) to amend the Schedule of Events (“SOE”) in appeals 3325457, 3325458, 3364046, 3408365, and 3447175 (the “Subject Appeals”). The Subject Appeals relate to 675 Upper James Street in the City of Hamilton (the “Subject Property”).
2The City of Hamilton, a respondent in the Subject Appeals, objected to the Appellant’s request.
3On March 9, 2022, the Board ordered that the matter be set to a written motion.
4On March 10, 2022, the Board provided notice of the written motion and required that the Appellant file any additional information and serve its motion material, inclusive of any evidence, on or before March 24, 2022.
5The Appellant did not file any additional information or motion material, including evidence, with the Board.
6Rule 69 of the Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure requires that evidence in support of a motion be provided in an affidavit, unless the Board directs otherwise. Rule 7 provides that the Board will determine the appropriate consequences of non-compliance with the Rules.
7The Board finds the Appellant has failed to provide evidence in support of the motion. Accordingly, the Board dismisses the Appellant’s motion.
ORDER
8The motion is dismissed.
"Carly Stringer"
CARLY STRINGER MEMBER Assessment Review Board
Website: www.tribunalsontario.ca/arb