Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: October 28, 2021
CASE NO(S).: PL200557
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of City of Burlington to adopt the requested amendment
Existing Designation: Old Lakeshore Road Mixed Use Precinct
Proposed Designated: Old Lakeshore Road Mixed Use Precinct with site specific policy change
Purpose: To permit a 27-storey apartment building with retail/commercial at grade
Property Address/Description: 2107 Old Lakeshore Road & 2119 Lakeshore Road
Municipality: City of Burlington
Approval Authority File No.: 505-02/20
OLT Case No.: PL200557
OLT File No.: PL200557
OLT Case Name: Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc. v. Burlington (City.)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc.
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 2020 - Refusal or neglect of City of Burlington to make a decision
Existing Zoning: Downtown Old Lakeshore Road (DL-A)
Proposed Zoning: Downtown Old Lakeshore Road with site specific exception (DL-A-XXX)
Purpose: To permit a 27-storey apartment building with retail/commercial at grade
Property Address/Description: 2107 Old Lakeshore Road & 2119 Lakeshore Road
Municipality: City of Burlington
Municipality File No.: 520-03/20
OLT Case No.: PL200557
OLT File No.: PL200558
Heard: August 6, 2021, by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel/Representative*
Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc.
Jennifer Meader on behalf of Scott Snider and Anna Toumanians
City of Burlington (“City”)
Blake Hurley
Regional Municipality of Halton (“Region”)
Kelly Yerxa
Core FSC Lakeshore LP (“Core”)
Matthew Lakatos-Hayward on behalf of Ian Andres and David Bronskill
Halton Condominium Corporation 160 (“HCC# 160”)
Patricia Torsney*
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY SHARYN VINCENT ON AUGUST 6, 2021 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1As directed at the first case management conference, the Parties, as established in the Tribunal’s decision issued April 27, 2021, have provided a draft Procedural Order for the consideration of the Tribunal to guide the hearing of appeals by Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc. against the failure of Council to make decisions with respect to applications seeking amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law in order to permit the redevelopment of the lands known municipally as 2107 Old Lakeshore Road and 2119 Lakeshore Road for a 27-storey mixed-use building.
2The Parties requested a 15-day hearing, the commencement of which to optimally follow a decision of the Tribunal, relating to a January 2022 hearing of the merit of the appeals by Core, those appeals being characterized as invoking a similar planning regime.
3Having consulted the Tribunal’s calendar, a commencement date of June 13, 2022, was confirmed with the Parties who were then directed by the Tribunal to make the necessary and some minor revisions to the draft Procedural Order.
4The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video on Monday, June 13, 2022 at 10 a.m.
5Parties and participants are asked to log into the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/865340373
Access code: 865-340-373
6Parties and participants are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
7Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling into an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9391 or (Toll Free) 1(888) 455-1389. The access code is 865-340-373.
8Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.
ORDER
9A hearing commencing June 13, 2022, inclusive to June 30, 2022, is hereby scheduled.
10The proceedings shall be in accord with the attached Procedural Order and Issues List, appended as Attachment 1, forming part of this Order.
11The Member is not seized.
“Sharyn Vincent”
SHARYN VINCENT
VICE CHAIR
Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248
The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.
ATTACHMENT 1
OLT CASE NO(S).: PL200557
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc.
Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure of City of Burlington to adopt the requested amendment
Existing Designation: Old Lakeshore Road Mixed Use Precinct
Proposed Designated: Old Lakeshore Road Mixed Use Precinct with site specific policy change
Purpose: To permit a 27-storey apartment building with retail/commercial at grade
Property Address/Description: 2107 Old Lakeshore Road & 2119 Lakeshore Road
Municipality: City of Burlington
Approval Authority File No.: 505-02/20
OLT Case No.: PL200557
OLT File No.: PL200557
OLT Case Name: Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc. v. Burlington (City.)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc.
Subject: Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 2020 - Refusal or neglect of City of Burlington to make a decision
Existing Zoning: Downtown Old Lakeshore Road (DL-A)
Proposed Zoning: Downtown Old Lakeshore Road with site specific exception (DL-A-XXX)
Purpose: To permit a 27-storey apartment building with retail/commercial at grade
Property Address/Description: 2107 Old Lakeshore Road & 2119 Lakeshore Road
Municipality: City of Burlington
Municipality File No.: 520-03/20
OLT Case No.: PL200557
OLT File No.: PL200558
- The Tribunal may vary or add to the directions in this procedural order at any time by an oral ruling or by another written order, either on the parties’ request or its own motion.
Organization of the Hearing
- The video hearing will begin on June 13, 2022 at 10 a.m. through the following video link:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/865340373
You can also dial in using your phone:
Canada (Toll Free): 1 888 455 1389
Canada: +1 (647) 497-9391
Access Code: 865-340-373
When prompted, enter the code: 865-340-373
The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 14 days. The parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible.
A summary of key dates are set out in Attachment 1.
The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 2.
The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 3. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.
The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 4 to this Order. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on the parties’ consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.
Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible – ideally before the case management conference. Any person who will be retaining a representative should advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number as soon as possible.
Any person who intends to participate in the hearing, including parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website.
Requirements Before the Hearing
A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before March 7, 2022 and in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’ Curriculum Vitae and specify the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified.
Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before March 21, 2022 to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting the parties must prepare and file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before March 30, 2022.
An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in paragraph 14 below. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file their entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert’s testimony.
Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence as in paragraph 14 below. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in paragraph 15 below.
On or before April 11, 2022, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
On or before April 11, 2022, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.
On or before May 30, 2022, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.
Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence on or before May 9, 2022 and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be filed with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before June 3, 2022.
A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.
A party who provides written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the party notifies the Tribunal at least 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.
The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before June 3, 2022 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.
All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by Rule 7 of the Tribunal’s Rules.
No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. The Tribunal’s Rule 17 applies to such requests.
This Member is [not] seized.
So orders the Tribunal.
ATTACHMENT 1
SUMMARY OF KEY DATES
DATE
EVENT
March 7, 2022
Exchange and filing of witness lists (including names, disciplines, CVs and order to be called)
March 21, 2022
Experts meeting prior to this date
March 30, 2022
File Agreed Statement of Facts
April 11, 2022
Exchange and filing of Witness Statements, Expert Reports and Participant Statements.
May 9, 2022
Exchange and filing of Reply Witness Statements (if any)
May 30, 2022
Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
June 3, 2022
File Joint Document Book and Hearing Plan
June 6, 2022
Notice if witnesses will not give oral evidence
June 13, 2022
Hearing commences
ATTACHMENT 2
LIST OF APPELLANTS, PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS
APPELLANT
- Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc.
Turkstra Mazza Associates 15 Bold Street Hamilton, ON L8P 1T3 Scott Snider and Anna Toumanians Tel: (905) 529-3476 Email: ssnider@tmalaw.ca/ Email: atoumanians@tmalaw.ca
PARTIES
- City of Burlington
City of Burlington 426 Brant Street, P.O. Box 5013 Burlington, ON L7R 3Z6 Blake Hurley Tel: 905.335.7600, ext. 7611 Email: Blake.Hurley@burlington.ca
- Condominium Corporation HCC-160
Patricia Torsney Tel: 905-631-9296 Email: paddytorsney@gmail.com
- Regional Municipality of Halton
Regional Municipality of Halton 1151 Bronte Road Oakville, ON L6M 3L1 Kelly Yerxa Tel: 905-825-6000, ext. 7740 Email: Kelly.Yerxa@halton.ca
- Core FSC Lakeshore LP
Goodmans LLP 333 Bay Street, Suite 3400 Toronto, ON. M5H 2S7 David Bronskill/Matthew Lakatos-Hayward Tel: 416-597-4299/416-849-6906 Email: dbronskill@goodmans.ca Email: mlakatoshayward@goodmans.ca
ATTACHMENT 3
ISSUES LIST
City of Burlington
Do the proposed amendments have regard for matters of Provincial interest identified in the Planning Act?
Are the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement given the location and context of the subject lands, and considering the level of intensification proposed?
Are the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment in conformity with to A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2020 given the proposed scale of development and proposed transition of built form to adjacent areas, specifically considering policies 1.2.1, 2.2.1, 2.2.3,5.1, 5.2.5(6), 5.2.5(8), 5.2.7?
Is an increase beyond ‘as of right’ zoning permissions and beyond Official Plan designation development standards required for the site, in order for the City to achieve any Growth Plan conformity targets?
Does the Subject Proposal conform to policies in the Regional Official Plan with respect to servicing and site contamination/remediation?
What weight, if any, should be given to Regional Official Plan Amendment 48 as adopted by the Region of Halton on July 7, 2021?
What weight, if any, should be given to the following policies of the City’s new Official Plan as approved by the Region on November 30, 2020 and currently under appeal:
a. Chapter 2 – 2.3.1, 2.4.2(1)
b. Chapter 3 – 3.5
c. Chapter 4 – 4.3.2, 4.4.2(2)
d. Chapter 5 – 5.4.5
e. Chapter 6 – 6.2.2(2), 6.2.4(1), 6.2.4(2)(j)(k), 6.2.10
f. Chapter 7
g. Chapter 8 – 8.1.1 (8.1.1(1), 8.1.1(2), 8.1.1(3), 8.1.1(3.1), 8.1.1(3.2), 8.1.1(3.6), 8.1.1(3.17, 3.17.1), 8.1.1(3.18, 3.18.1, 3.18.2, 3.18.4), 8.1.1(3.19, 3.19.1, 3.19.3 (excluding f), 3.19.4 to 3.19.6), 8.1.1(3.21, 3.21.1), 8.1.1(3.22), 8.1.1(3.23), 8.1.1(3.24))
h. Chapter 12 – 12.1.1(3) i), 12.1.2(2 to 2.2, excluding 2.2d) and e)), 12.8.1 (1 to 2), 12.1.13(2)
i. Chapter 13 – Definitions (definitions included in the aforementioned policies)
If weight is to be assigned, what are the implications of the application of the policies to the Proposed Development?
- Are the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment in conformity with, and do they maintain the intent of, the policies of the City’s Official Plan, including:
a. Part I – 3.0(h)
b. Part II – 2.8, 2.11.3, 3.0(3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, 3.6), 6.0 (6.5, 6.6), 8.0
c. Part III - 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 5.0 (5.4.1, 5.4.2, 5.5.1, 5.5.2, 5.5.3, 5.5.7, 5.5.7.1, 5.5.7.2, 5.5.12, 5.5.14, 5.5.15)
d. Part VIII – Definitions (definitions included in the aforementioned policies)
Does the Proposed Development represent an appropriate level of density and intensification for the subject lands and does the proposed density and intensification conform with or maintain the intent of the City’s Intensification Strategy as implemented through the City’s Official Plan?
Does the Proposed Development represent appropriate urban design in addressing matters including height, density, form, massing, bulk, scale, siting, transitions, building articulation, setbacks and spacing having regard for the site and the character of the surrounding lands?
Does the proposed 27-storey development represent an appropriate building height?
Is the height and massing of the proposed podium appropriate given the existing and planned surrounding development context?
What weight, if any, should be given to the applicable Council-approved design guidelines? If weight is to be assigned, what are the implications of the application of the guidelines to the Proposed Development.
Does the Proposed Development provide for appropriate streetscapes with a pedestrian scale, including along Old Lakeshore Road where a reduced setback and layby parking are proposed?
Does the Proposed Development provide an appropriate right-of-way width for Lakeshore Road?
Does the Proposed Development provide a sufficient number of parking spaces, including bicycle and accessible parking? Are the parking spaces appropriately dimensioned? Is there sufficient justification for the proposed reduced parking rates and bicycle stall dimensions?
Would the Proposed Development result in adverse wind or shadow impacts on the subject property, adjacent public realm or nearby residential properties?
Are setbacks to hardscaped surfaces and the underground parking structure sufficient to support mature landscaping and provide an adequate visual and spatial buffer?
Would the Proposed Development result in any negative impacts to adjacent properties relating to stormwater, grading, groundwater, noise, etc.?
Would the Proposed Development result in any negative hydrogeological impacts in the vicinity of the subject site and have any potential impacts been appropriately and sustainably mitigated?
Would the Proposed Development result in any negative geotechnical impacts in the vicinity of the subject site?
If approved by the Tribunal, what are the appropriate Planning Act section 37 benefits in relation to the Proposed Development?
Does the Proposed Development represent good land use planning?
Condominium Corporation HCC-160
Are the proposed official plan amendment and proposed zoning by-law amendment consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020?
Are the proposed official plan amendment and proposed zoning by-law amendment in conformity with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020?
Are the proposed official plan amendment and proposed zoning by-law amendment in conformity with the City of Burlington Official Plan?
Will the development permitted by the proposed official plan amendment and proposed zoning by-law amendment result in an overdevelopment of the site?
What effect, if any, should the proposed development’s proximity to the downtown transit stop have on the proposed density for this project?
Will the development permitted by the proposed official plan amendment and proposed zoning by-law amendment result in an appropriate level of intensification for the subject lands?
Is the proposed development an appropriate building height for the subject lands?
Will the development permitted by the proposed official plan amendment and proposed zoning by-law amendment result in unacceptable traffic conflicts and safety issues added to the area particularly when other projects underway or proposed are developed? If so, what amendments to the proposed official plan amendment and proposed zoning by-law amendment, revisions to the building, site plan, traffic and/or road improvements are required to mitigate these impacts?
Will the development permitted by the proposed official plan amendment and proposed zoning by-law amendment result in adverse privacy and overlook, noise, shadow and pedestrian safety issues? Does the location of the proposed common element outdoor space cause undue nuisance impact on existing neighbours?
Does the proposed zoning by-law amendment appropriately regulate matters of built form, including height, density, massing, scale, setbacks, spacing, and transition having regarding for the site and the character of the surrounding lands?
Does the proposed development represent good land use planning and is it in the public interest?
Regional Municipality of Halton
Do the applications conform with the Regional Official Plan, in particular Sections 77, 78, 81, and 81.1?
What regard, if any, should be given to the Region’s Notice of Decision on November 30, 2020 regarding the City’s new Official Plan?
Will the issue around site contamination be addressed through a Record of Site Condition (RSC)?
Is it appropriate to require an “H” in the amendment to City of Burlington Zoning By-law 2020 on condition that the “H” can be lifted once the RSC is filed?
What impact, if any, does the April 2020 announcement by the Province that the John Street Terminal is no longer required as a Downtown Mobility Hub on the conformity of the applications with the Regional Official Plan?
Have the applications adequately addressed Regional servicing matters such as water, wastewater, and waste management?
Core FSC Lakeshore LP
- Will the proposed instruments provide for an appropriate built form and functional relationship with development on the adjacent lands to the west (2093, 2097, 2101 Old Lakeshore Road and 2096, 2100 Lakeshore Road)?
Note 1: Where an issue refers to a provision from the PPS or the Growth Plan or either of the Official Plans in addressing the issue, the planning document from which the provision is taken should be read in its entirety with all relevant provisions being considered. For greater certainty, the identification of a specific provision in an issue does not preclude the parties from referring to other provisions from the same planning document in addressing that issue.
Note 2: The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing.
ATTACHMENT 4
ORDER OF EVIDENCE
Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc.
City of Burlington
Condominium Corporation HCC-160
Regional Municipality of Halton
Core FSC Lakeshore LP
Old Lakeshore (Burlington) Inc. (Reply, if any)
ATTACHMENT 5
MEANING OF TERMS USED IN THE PROCEDURAL ORDER
A party is an individual or corporation permitted by the Tribunal to participate fully in the hearing by receiving copies of written evidence, presenting witnesses, cross-examining the witnesses of the other parties, and making submissions on all of the evidence. An unincorporated group cannot be a party and it must appoint one person to speak for it, and that person must accept the other responsibilities of a party as set out in the Order. Parties do not have to be represented by a lawyer and may have an agent speak for them. The agent must have written authorisation from the party.
NOTE that a person who wishes to become a party before or at the hearing, and who did not request this at the case management conference (CMC), must ask the Tribunal to permit this.
A participant is an individual or corporation, whether represented by a lawyer or not, who may make a written submission to the Tribunal. A participant cannot make an oral submission to the Tribunal or present oral evidence (testify in-person) at the hearing (only a party may do so). Section 17 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act states that a person who is not a party to a proceeding may only make a submission to the Tribunal in writing. The Tribunal may direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions from the Tribunal on the content of their written submission, should that be found necessary by the Tribunal. A participant may also be asked questions by the parties should the Tribunal direct a participant to attend a hearing to answer questions on the content of their written submission.
A participant must be identified and be accorded participant status by the Tribunal at the CMC. A participant will not receive notice of conference calls on procedural issues that may be scheduled prior to the hearing, nor receive notice of mediation. A participant cannot ask for costs, or review of a decision, as a participant does not have the rights of a party to make such requests of the Tribunal.
Written evidence includes all written material, reports, studies, documents, letters and witness statements which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing. These must have pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire document, even if there are tabs or dividers in the material.
Visual evidence includes photographs, maps, videos, models, and overlays which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing.
A witness statement is a short written outline of the person’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which he or she will discuss ; and a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing.
An expert witness statement should include his or her (1) name and address, (2) qualifications, (3) a list of the issues he or she will address, (4) the witness’ opinions on those issues and the complete reasons supporting their opinions and conclusions and (5) a list of reports or materials that the witness will rely on at the hearing. An expert witness statement must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of expert’s duty.
A participant statement is a short written outline of the person’s or group’s background, experience and interest in the matter; a statement of the participant’s position on the appeal; a list of the issues which the participant wishes to address and the submissions of the participant on those issues; and a list of reports or materials, if any, which the participant wishes to refer to in their statement.
Additional Information
A summons may compel the appearance of a person before the Tribunal who has not agreed to appear as a witness. A party must ask a Tribunal Member or the senior staff of the Tribunal to issue a summons through a request. (See Rule 13 on the summons procedure.) The request should indicate how the witness’ evidence is relevant to the hearing. If the Tribunal is not satisfied from the information provided in the request that the evidence is relevant, necessary or admissible, the party requesting the summons may provide a further request with more detail or bring a motion in accordance with the Rules.
The order of examination of witnesses is usually direct examination, cross-examination and re-examination in the following way:
- direct examination by the party presenting the witness;
- direct examination by any party of similar interest, in the manner determined by the Tribunal;
- cross-examination by parties of opposite interest;
- re-examination by the party presenting the witness; or
- another order of examination mutually agreed among the parties or directed by the Tribunal.