Administrative Law - OBAH

The applicants sought to confirm the boundary between their property and the objector's property under the Boundaries Act.

The objector claimed the boundary was located further north, aligning with an easement.

The objector failed to attend the hearing after multiple adjournments.

The Deputy Director of Titles proceeded in the objector's absence and accepted the applicant's expert surveyor evidence, which retraced the boundary based on historical surveys and original monuments.

The application was allowed, the objection was denied, and the boundary was confirmed as shown on the applicant's draft plan of survey.

The applicant sought confirmation under the Boundaries Act of the true location of the boundaries of a property known as Rossini Park.

The objector, who owned the abutting water lot to the north, disputed the northerly boundary of the park, arguing it should be the limit depicted on Plan 813 rather than the current water's edge.

The applicant claimed the disputed land was the result of natural accretion.

The tribunal found that fill material had been intentionally and substantially deposited both into the water and onto the dry land between 1931 and 1944, which fixed the boundary position at its last known location prior to the filling event.

The tribunal dismissed the application in part, allowed the objection, and confirmed the northerly limit of the park as retraced by the objector's surveyor.