Oulahen Team Realty Inc. v. Toronto (City), 2022 CanLII 78156

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: August 26, 2022

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002137

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Oulahen Team Realty Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure of the City of Toronto to adopt the requested amendment

Description: To permit the construction of three residential towers

Reference Number: 21 193212 NNY 18 OZ

Property Address: 48, 50, 56, 58 and 60 Avondale Avenue

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002137

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002137

OLT Case Name: Oulahen Team Realty Inc. v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Oulahen Team Realty Inc.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect of the City of Toronto to make a decision

Description: To permit the construction of three residential towers

Reference Number: 21 193212 NNY 18 OZ

Property Address: 48, 50, 56, 58 and 60 Avondale Avenue

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002138

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002137

Heard: July 22, 2022 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel*/Representative
Oulahen Team Realty Inc. ("Applicant"/"Appellant")	D. Bronskill*
City of Toronto ("City")	S. O'Connor* C. Dougherty* (in absentia)
William Wang	Self-represented
Malcolm Eylott	Self-represented

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY S. TOUSAW ON JULY 22, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

Introduction

1This is the first Case Management Conference ("CMC") for the Applicant's appeals to the absence of decisions by the City, on applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment, for three residential towers within North York Centre.

2The site of approximately 0.75 hectares is located within the second block east of Yonge Street, with frontage on Glendora Avenue to the north, Bales Avenue to the west, and Avondale Avenue to the south. Sixteen existing detached dwellings are proposed to be replaced with three towers of varying heights containing a total of 1,137 units.

Notice

3The Applicant's Affidavit of Service for Notice of this CMC was marked as Exhibit 1.

4William Wang and Malcolm Eylott expressed concern that they did not receive written notice of today's CMC. The Applicant confirmed that Notice was mailed to the extensive list of persons attached to Exhibit 1, and that individuals may not have received such Notice for such reasons as condominium ownership or a recent change of address.

5The Tribunal is satisfied that sufficient Notice was issued and that no further Notice is required. Any person who wishes to be added to the Tribunal's circulation list for this case may email their request to the Tribunal's Case Coordinator, Tamara Zwarycz, at: Tamara.Zwarycz@ontario.ca

Parties and Participants

6The statutory Parties for these appeals are the Applicant/Appellant and the City.

7Mr. Wang of 26 Glendora Avenue sought Party status for himself as a nearby resident, and for Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation 1782 ("TSCC 1782" or "condominium") for which he is a Board member. With consent of the statutory Parties, the Tribunal granted Party status to Mr. Wang but did not grant Party status to the condominium in the absence of a formal request from such corporation. Should the condominium seek Party status, its application, if filed, may be addressed at the next CMC.

8Malcolm Eylott of 64 Avondale Avenue sought Party status as a landowner abutting the site. With consent of the statutory Parties, the Tribunal granted Party status to Mr. Eylott.

9Neither of the added Parties proposes to call independent expert witnesses at the hearing, but may wish to give evidence and/or ask questions of the witnesses proffered by the statutory Parties. The issues of the added Parties are included in the Procedural Order ("PO") and the statutory Parties will keep them apprised of settled issues that may occur.

10The Tribunal advised the added Parties to be aware of their role and responsibilities as set out in the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

11The Tribunal granted Participant status to two requestors who are area residents: Haochuan Wu of 46 Avondale Avenue; and Linda Wu of 31-35 Bales Avenue.

Next Steps

12The Parties will continue discussions to narrow the issues and will advise the Tribunal should formal mediation be sought. A further CMC was scheduled, along with the hearing dates, as set out below. The Parties will advise at the next CMC whether fewer days may be required for the hearing. The Tribunal approves the Procedural Order ("PO") attached as Attachment 1 to this Decision.

13Within the timeframe requested by the Parties, the next CMC will be held on Wednesday, February 22, 2023 at 10 a.m. by video conference, and the hearing on the merits is scheduled for nine days commencing on Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 10 a.m. by video conference. No further Notice will be given.

14The hearing details are as follows:

Wednesday, February 22, 2023 at 10 a.m. (one day) GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/709076365 Access code: 709-076-365 Audio-only telephone line: (Toll Free) 1(888) 299-1889 or +1(647) 497-9373 Audio-only access code: 709-076-365

Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 10 a.m. (nine days) GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/519389173 Access code: 519-389-173 Audio-only line: (Toll Free) 1(888) 299-1889 or +1(647) 497-9373 Audio-only access code: 519-389-173

15Parties 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.

16Parties 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

17Persons 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.

18Individuals 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

19The Tribunal Orders its orders and directions as set out above.

20This Member is not seized but may be contacted through the Tribunal's Case Coordinator should procedural matters arise.

"S. Tousaw"

S. TOUSAW MEMBER

Ontario Land Tribunal Website: www.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

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002137

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Oulahen Team Realty Inc.

Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure of the City of Toronto to adopt the requested amendment

Description: To permit the construction of three residential towers

Reference Number: 21 193212 NNY 18 OZ

Property Address: 48, 50, 56, 58 and 60 Avondale Avenue

Municipality: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002137

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002137

OLT Case Name: Oulahen Team Realty Inc. v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant/ Appellant: Oulahen Team Realty Inc

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect of the City of Toronto to make a decision

Description: To permit the construction of three residential towers

Reference Number: 21 193212 NNY 18 OZ

Property Address: 48, 50, 56, 58 and 60 Avondale Avenue

Municipality: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002138

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002137

PROCEDURAL ORDER

1. 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

2. The video hearing will begin on August 8, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. A second case management conference is scheduled for February 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.

3. The length of the hearing is nine (9) 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.

4. The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 1 (see the sample procedural order for the meaning of these terms).

5. The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 2. 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.

6. The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 3 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.

7. 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.

8. 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

9. 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 April 21, 2023 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 the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified.

10. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before May 19, 2023, and use best efforts 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 May 19, 2023.

11. 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 13 below. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert's testimony.

12. 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 13 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 13 below.

13. On or before June 16, 2023, 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.

14. On or before June 16, 2023, 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.

15. On or before July 7, 2023, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

16. On or before July 14, 2023, 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.

17. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence within ten (10) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

18. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before July 21.

19. 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.

20. 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.

21. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before July 28, 2023, 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.

22. 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 the Rule 7.

23. If the applicant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, the applicant shall provide copies of the revised proposal, including all revised plans, drawings, proposed instruments, updated supporting documents and reports, to the other Parties on or before March 31, 2023. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the Parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

24. 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 DATES

DATE	EVENT
March 31, 2023	Applicant to provide revised materials (if any) for hearing
April 21, 2023	Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
May 5, 2023	Last date to challenge identification of expert witness
May 19, 2023	Experts Meeting and Agreed Statement of Facts
June 16, 2023	Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements
June 29, 2023	Exchange of Reply Witness Statements (if any)
July 14, 2023	Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
July 21, 2023	Preparation of Joint Document Book
July 28, 2023	Final Work Plan filed with the Tribunal
August 8, 2023	Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT 2

LIST OF PARTIES/PARTICIPANTS

PARTIES

1. Oulahen Team Realty Inc. David Bronskill, Goodmans LLP dbronskill@goodmans.ca 416.597.4299

2. City of Toronto Sarah O'Connor/Colin Dougherty sarah.oconnor@toronto.ca/colin.dougherty@toronto.ca 416.397.5378/416.392.3116

3. Malcolm Eylott malcolmeylott@rogers.com 416.294.5599

4. William Wang williamwang.to@gmail.com 416.992.6311

PARTICIPANTS

1. Haochuan Wu whc_6088@hotmail.com 416.222.8173

2. Linda Wu Michael.linda.wu@gmail.com 519-319-2455

ATTACHMENT 3

ISSUES LIST

CITY OF TORONTO

ISSUES LIST of the CITY of TORONTO

1. Height & Density Is the height of the proposed development and for the zoning by-law amendment good planning? Is the proposed height appropriate for the site? In particular: a) Does the proposal have appropriate regard for the Tall Building Guidelines, particularly Guidelines 1.4, and 3.1.1? b) Does the proposal conform with the Toronto Official Plan, particularly polices 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 4.2.2, 4.2.3, and 4.5.2? c) Does the proposal conform with the North York Centre Secondary Plan, particularly Policies 1.10, 1.13, 1.14, 3.2, 3.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.6? d) Does the proposal have regard for the Planning Act, particularly subsections 2(r)?

2. Built form Do the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment provide for a built form that is good planning? Is the proposed built form appropriate in terms of massing and transition? In particular: a) Does the proposal have appropriate regard for the Tall Building Design Guidelines particularly Guidelines 1.4, 2.1, 2.4, 3.1.1 3.1.2, and 3.2.2, and 3.2.3? b) Does the proposal conform with the Toronto Official Plan, particularly polices 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 4.2.2, 4.2.3, and 4.5.2? c) Does the proposal conform with the North York Centre Secondary Plan, particularly Policies 1.13, 1.14, 3.2, 3.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.6? d) Does the proposal have regard for the Planning Act, particularly subsections 2(r)?

3. Public Realm Does the proposed development's relationship with the public realm, including the streetscape improvements represent good planning? Does it result in a high quality public realm? In particular: a) Does the proposal have appropriate regard for the Tall Building Design Guidelines, particularly Guidelines 2.4, 4.3 and 4.4? b) Does the proposal conform with the Toronto Official Plan, particularly policies 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 4.5 and 5.2.1? c) Does the proposal have appropriate conform with the North York Centre Secondary Plan, particularly policies 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.6 and 6.4?

4. Transportation Do the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment provide sufficient parking to support the proposed development? In particular: a) Does the proposed development provide an appropriate Transportation Demand Management strategy that satisfies Toronto Official Plan, particularly policies 2.4.2, 2.4.3, and 2.4.9? b) Does the proposal conform with the North York Centre Secondary Plan, particularly Policies 1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 8.3, 8.4, 8.6 and Appendix 1? c) Does the proposed development provided a right-of-way dedication on Avondale Drive that conforms with the North York Centre Secondary Plan?

5. Parks a. Does the proposed development and proposed parkland dedication conform to Policy 3.2.3 of the City of Toronto Official Plan? b. Does the proposal conform with the North York Centre Secondary Plan, particularly Policies 1.13, 1.14, 6.2, and 6.5? c. Has a parkland dedication of an appropriate size, location and configuration been proposed under Section 42 of the Planning Act? d. Has a parkland dedication been provided which conforms to Chapter 415 Article III of the Toronto Municipal Code?

6. Engineering Matters a. Is there sufficient infrastructure capacity to accommodate the proposed development (including water, sanitary and stormwater)?

7. Rental Housing a. Does the proposed development conform to Policy 3.2.1 of the City of Toronto Official Plan?

8. Implementation/Order if approved In the event the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied: a) The official plan and zoning by-law amendment has been prepared in a content and form satisfactory to the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; b) The owner has submitted revised architectural and landscape plans, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; c) The owner has submitted revised shadow study and wind tunnel test and study, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; d) The owner has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Engineering and Construction Services as they relate to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment application, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and construction Services; e) the owner has addressed all outstanding issues raised by Urban Forestry, Tree Protection and Plan Review as they relate to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment application, to the satisfaction of the Supervisor, Tree Protection and Plan Review, the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation and the City Solicitor; and f) City Council has approved the Rental Housing Demolition application (File 21 193226 NNY 18 RH) under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code pursuant to Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, to permit the demolition of the existing rental dwelling units at 48, 50, 56, 58 and 60 Avondale Avenue, 17 and 19 Bales Avenue, and 25, 35, 39, 41,43, 45,51, 53 and 55 Glendora Avenue and the owner has entered into, and registered on title to the lands, one or more agreements with the City, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor, securing all rental housing-related matters necessary to implement City Council's decision.

MALCOLM EYLOTT

1. Would approval of the proposed development result in unacceptable traffic impacts? Would approval of the proposed development result in unacceptable transit impacts? Would approval of the proposed development result in unacceptable impacts on cyclists?
2. Would approval of the proposed development result in unacceptable parking impacts in the neighbourhood? Does the proposal provide a sufficient amount of parking for residents and visitors?
3. Will the proposed development result in unacceptable shadow impacts on surrounding properties?
4. Are there sufficient services and public facilities, including public hospitals, in the area to accommodate the proposed development?

WILLIAM WANG

1. Will the proposed development result in unacceptable shadow impacts on the townhouses located on the lands known municipally as 22-32 Glendora Avenue (the "Glendora Townhouses") and the condominium towers on the lands known municipally as 31 and 35 Bales Avenue (the "Bales Towers")? Will the proposed development result in unacceptable shadow impacts on the parkette located on the north side of Glendora Avenue?
2. Will the proposed development result in unacceptable impacts on sky view for the residents of the Glendora Townhouses and Bales Towers?
3. Will the proposed development result in unacceptable privacy impacts for the residents of the Glendora Townhouses and the Bales Towers?
4. Will the proposed development result in an appropriate streetscape and public realm?
5. Would approval of the proposed development result in unacceptable traffic impacts? Can fire and/or ambulance services use Glendora Avenue in the event that the development is approved?
6. Is there capacity from existing schools within the Toronto District School Board and Toronto Catholic District School Board that are reasonably accessible (i.e., within half-hour walking distance) for school-aged students to support approval of the proposed development?
7. Are there sufficient public facilities that are reasonably accessible in the area to support the increased population that the proposed development will introduce?
8. Should electronic charging stations and/or care share spaces be required as part of the proposed development?
9. Are trees on Glendora Avenue required to be removed to accommodate the proposed development? If so, is it appropriate to require removal of such trees?

ATTACHMENT 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. Oulahen Team Realty Inc.
2. City of Toronto
3. Malcolm Eylott
4. William Wang
5. Oulahen Team Realty Inc. in 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 authorization 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.