Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE:
July 19, 2022
CASE NO(S).:
OLT-22-002919
(Formerly LC210024)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 26(b) of the Expropriations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.26, as amended
Claimant:
Abdul Mian Qayyum
Respondent:
City of Barrie
Subject:
Land Compensation
Property Address/ Description:
17 McKay Road
Municipality:
City of Barrie
OLT Case No.:
OLT-22-002919
Legacy Case No.:
LC210024
OLT Lead Case No.:
OLT-22-002919
Legacy Lead Case No.:
LC210024
OLT Case Name:
Qayyum v. Barrie (City)
Heard:
June 20, 2022 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Abdul Mian Qayyum (“Owner”)
Paul Scargall
City of Barrie (“City”)
Peter Krysiak
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY DAVID L. LANTHIER ON JUNE 20, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
1This is the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) in this proceeding. The City expropriated the Owner’s lands municipally known as 17 McKay Road in the City of Barrie. The City served and filed a Notice of Arbitration to determine the compensation payable to the Owner for the taking of the lands.
2Initially, when the Notice of Arbitration was filed with the Tribunal on May 4, 2021, the City advised that the parties were in negotiations and that no CMC was required. By August of 2021, there had been no progress and there were communications regarding scheduling. In April of this year the City indicated that it was necessary to move forward due to ongoing prejudice as interest continued to accrue and wished to schedule a hearing. A date was proposed but the Owner wished to instead proceed to a CMC. There was no consensus and this CMC was scheduled. The City has filed an Affidavit of Documents but the Owner has not. The City’s view is that it does not intend to examine the Owner. Five days are estimated as the maximum time required for the hearing.
3Today the parties have indicated that settlement discussions have continued to a point where the City’s last position was communicated but Counsel for the Owner has been unable to seek instructions. Mr. Scargall indicates that receiving instructions from his client is usually delayed, and he needs to seek instructions. The City again has emphasized the need to move forward to a hearing if the matter cannot be resolved.
4It is premature to set a further CMC when the parties are at an impasse and counsel for the Owner is unable to obtain instructions in a timely manner. However, if the matter cannot be resolved by settlement, the City is not unreasonable in its insistence that the proceeding move forward without further delay.
5The Owner will have until Friday, August 19, 2022 in which to respond and decide whether the matter can be resolved between the parties. If the parties agree that they wish to request Tribunal-led mediation they may make such request to the Tribunal.
6At any time before August 19, 2022, if the parties conclude that a settlement is not possible and they are ready to move forward, the request can immediately be made to the Case Coordinator to schedule a further CMC to be conducted as a telephone conference call. If by August 19, 2022 the matter is not resolved the Tribunal will schedule the next CMC at the earliest available date and provide notice to Counsel.
7At any time, should a settlement be achieved, the parties are to immediately advise the Tribunal that the file may be closed unless the Tribunal must be addressed on the matter of costs or the assistance of the Tribunal is required with respect to any proposed settlement.
8The Tribunal provides the following directions with respect to the next CMC if and when scheduled. To allow for the orderly and timely case management of this proceeding, the Owner is hereby directed to provide instructions to his counsel in a timely fashion as to such matters:
(a) The City will provide the Owner with a draft Procedural Order and Issues List not less than 14 days before the scheduled CMC. The Owner will promptly respond as to the proposed form of the Procedural Order. The draft will be filed with the Tribunal not later than seven (7) days prior to the scheduled CMC.
(b) Based on the estimated time periods required to satisfy all deadlines for all discovery and pre-hearing requirements for the hearing, the Parties will also advise the Tribunal prior to the CMC as to the earliest start-date that a video hearing of the proceeding may be scheduled by the Tribunal and provide any conflict dates for counsel and proposed witnesses within a five-month period following that earliest date of availability for the commencement of the hearing.
(c) Both the Owner and the City will attend to the CMC prepared to address all matters relating to the final form of the Procedural Order and Issues List, and the scheduling of the hearing on the merits.
9This Panel Member will remain available for the purposes of continued case management to the extent that the Tribunal’s calendar permits but is not seized.
10All further notices with respect to any scheduled hearing events will be provided by email to counsel of record.
11The Tribunal so orders and provides these directives for the purposes of the case management of this proceeding under the Expropriation Act.
“David L. Lanthier”
DAVID L. LANTHIER
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.