Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: November 30, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000158, OLT-23-000343
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 26(1) of the Expropriation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.26, as amended
Claimant: Osmington (Union Station) Inc.
Respondent: Metrolinx
Subject: Land Compensation
Property Address: 65 Front Street
Municipality: City of Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000158
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000158
OLT Case Name: Osmington (Union Station) Inc. v. Metrolinx
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 26(1) of the Expropriation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.26, as amended
Claimant: City of Toronto
Respondent: Metrolinx
Subject: Land Compensation
Property Address: 65 Front Street
Municipality: City of Toronto
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000343
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000343
OLT Case Name: City of Toronto v. Metrolinx
Heard: November 23, 2023 by Video Hearing (“VH”)
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
City of Toronto (“City”)
C. Barnett/D. Williams/M. Mahoney
Osmington (Union Station) Inc. (“Osmington”)
I. Andres
Metrolinx
C. Williams/T. Hill
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BLAIR S. TAYLOR ON NOVEMBER 23, 2023 AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The Tribunal held its third Case Management Conference (“CMC”) on these claims to receive a status update on a number of matters, including but not limited to: mediation, agreement on the lands expropriated, a common visual evidence book, and a draft Procedural Order (“PO”).
2That these claims are very complex is evidenced by the fact that notwithstanding the Tribunal’s first CMC in July of 2023, it has taken until this CMC for an agreement to be reached on the lands that were expropriated. This arises in part from the various levels of Union Station and the involvement of air rights in the claims.
DECISION
3For the reasons set out below, the Tribunal will set down a 40 day hearing on the merits to commence on Monday, June 9, 2025 at 10 a.m.
MEDIATION
4The Tribunal was advised that the parties had participated in three or four sessions of Tribunal-led mediation. However as of November 17, 2023, the parties were unable to arrive at a way to move forward, and the discussions went into abeyance, but with all the parties agreeing that they were still open to such mediation pending the unfolding of the evidentiary process.
THE TAKINGS
5With the consent of all the parties, the Tribunal was provided with Exhibit 1 entitled Summary of Takings dated November 20, 2023.
COMMON VISUAL EVIDENCE BOOK
6At the first CMC in July of 2023, the Tribunal had raised the prospect of the preparation of a common visual evidence book to assist all involved to illustrate, for example, the land ownerships, the limits of the leasehold interest of Osmington, the depictions of the takings, the location of the air rights in issue, etc.
7The Tribunal was provided with an electronic document entitled Visual Briefing Book, Union Station, November 2023. The parties confirmed that this document was provided with the consent of all the parties.
8The Tribunal’s hard copy was marked as Exhibit 2, and the electronic document has been saved to a memory stick. In addition, the Tribunal had requested and the parties had provided a much larger hard copy of Exhibit 2 to facilitate ease of review and the Tribunal thanks the parties for that.
DRAFT PROCEDURAL ORDERS
9In the lead up to the third CMC, the Tribunal had received two draft POs: the first from Metrolinx (Exhibit 3) and the second from the City and Osmington (Exhibit 4).
10There was a great similarity between the two documents: each was based on a 40 day hearing in 2025 and had a detailed process with regard to the exchange of documents, the exchange of expert reports, the timing for discoveries and providing answers and any motions that might arise, etc.
11The one substantial difference between Exhibit 3 and Exhibit 4 was its hearing commencement date: the City and Osmington recommended April 7, 2025 and Metrolinx recommended September 15, 2025.
12Counsel were asked by the Tribunal whether, if the Tribunal were to set a hearing date, would the parties be able complete the revised timing of the various events in the draft PO among themselves? The Tribunal was advised that could be done, but in an abundance of caution they asked that the Tribunal note that it could be spoken to in the event of an impasse.
2025 HEARING COMMENCEMENT DATE
13In proposing that the Tribunal set the earlier commencement date of April 7, 2025, the City and Osmington submitted that while the expropriations had been taken in 2020, post expropriation there had been much discussion with Metrolinx and that it was no surprise to Metrolinx when both Osmington and the City filed their claims in 2023. Their draft PO (Exhibit 4) allowed, they argued, ample time for discoveries. They submitted that even though the matters were exceedingly complex, their proposed timing was reasonable and that any delay would prejudice their clients. They wished the Tribunal to note that any hearing date beyond April 7, 2025 would likely result in their request for a higher interest rate pursuant to the provisions of the Expropriations Act.
14The position