Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: December 18, 2023 CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000641

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

Applicant/Appellant: Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit the development of 220, three-storey townhouse units Reference Number: OPA 2022-02 Property Address: Block 2 and 28 of Registered Plan 7M-41 and Part 7 of Lot 5, Concession 2 of Reference Plan 7R5452 Municipality/UT: Mono/Dufferin OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000641 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000641 OLT Case Name: Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation v. Mono (Town)

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

Applicant/Appellant: Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit the development of 220, three-storey townhouse units Reference Number: ZBA 2022-02 Property Address: Block 2 and 28 of Registered Plan 7M-41 and Part 7 of Lot 5, Concession 2 of Reference Plan 7R5452 Municipality/UT: Mono/Dufferin OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000642 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000641

Heard: November 23, 2023, by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation	E. Costello
Town of Mono	S. Floras, J. Wilker (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION BY STEVEN T. MASTORAS ON NOVEMBER 23, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1The matter before the Tribunal is a second Case Management Conference (“CMC”) based on appeals pursuant to s. 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act (“Act”) for failure to adopt the requested amendment and the refusal or neglect to make a decision respectively by the Town of Mono (“Town”). Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation (“Applicant”) is seeking an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and a Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) (together “Appeals”) for the lands legally known as Block 2 and 28 of Registered Plan 7M-41 and Part 7 of Lot 5, Concession 2 of Reference Plan 7R5452 (collectively “Subject Lands”). There is no current numerical municipal address of record.

2The Applications propose the redevelopment of the Subject Lands with a residential condominium community comprised of 220, three-storey townhouse units with internal garages. The proposed development anticipates housing approximately 510 residents (2.32 persons/unit). A total of 52 visitor parking spaces and various shared common areas including landscaped open spaces and recreational areas are proposed. Two entrances are proposed to access the Subject Lands from Kingfisher Drive.

3A communal wastewater treatment system is proposed to service the Subject Lands which are abutting the north side of Monora Park Drive, also owned by the Applicant. This neighbouring site is proposed to be maintained for future commercial development. The Applications were deemed completed as of October 13, 2022.

HEARING, PROCEDURAL ORDER, ISSUES LIST AND INTENDED MOTION.

4The Parties submitted a draft Procedural Order and Issues List (“PO/IL”) on November 21, 2023, to the Tribunal.

5The draft PO/IL contains a preamble (paragraphs 2-5) referring to a Preliminary Motion from the Town, not yet served pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”), with a request for a suggested two-day hearing to be scheduled specific to the intended Motion, still pending.

6Counsel for the Town asserts that:

The issue as to whether the appellant’s official plan amendment, that seeks approval for a communal wastewater treatment system, is premature is a matter to be decided at the motion the Town is requesting. The Town is asking that a two-day motion be established in a procedural order. The Tribunal may formalize a prematurity or jurisdictional motion in a procedural order, simply because the hearing may, or may not proceed based on the outcome of the motion.

7Although this is not the usual method by which a Notice of Motion should be initiated with the Tribunal, the Tribunal maintains its discretion to schedule both a Hearing on a pending/intended Notice of Motion and a Hearing on the Merits of the Appeals, should the Motion fail.

8After careful consideration of the respective calendars of the Parties and allowing for a reasonable period of time for the Parties to properly adhere to the Tribunal’s Rules, the Tribunal has scheduled a Notice of Motion Hearing to commence on Thursday, January 25, 2024, by video at 10 a.m. for a period of two days.

9Without Prejudice to the Hearing on the Motion, and on consent of the Parties the Tribunal directs that a Merit Hearing is scheduled to commence on Monday, June 17, 2024, to Thursday, July 4, 2024 by video. This excludes Monday, June 24 2024, (Tribunal conflict) and Monday, July 1, 2024, (Canada Day) for a total of 12 days.

10The hearings are scheduled to proceed by video as follows:

Thursday, January 25, 2024, at 10 a.m. (Two-Day Motion Hearing)

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/927921077

Access code: 927-921-077

Audio-only telephone line: (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889 or +1(647) 497-9391

Audio-only access code 927-921-077

Monday, June 17 2024 to Thursday, July 4, 2024, at 10 a.m. (12-Day Merit Hearing)

GoTo Meeting: https://meet.goto.com/943363669

Access code: 943-363-669

Audio-only telephone line: (Toll Free) 1 888 299 1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373

Audio-only access code 943-363-669

11The Parties 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.

12Parties 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

13Persons 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.

14Individuals 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.

15The Parties are also directed to provide the Case Coordinator with an amended Final PO/IL on or before Friday, March 29, 2024, should the Motion Decision allow for the Merit Hearing to proceed in order to address any duplication and/or scoping of Issues in the draft PO/IL currently before the Tribunal.

16Finally, the Tribunal reminds the Parties that Tribunal-led mediation is available if mutually agreed upon and if requested through the Case Coordinator.

ORDER

17THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:

a) A Motion Hearing is scheduled to commence on Thursday, January 25, 2024 and Friday, January 26, 2024 by video at 10 a.m.

b) A Merit Hearing is scheduled to commence on Monday, June 17, 2024 to Thursday, July 4 2024 by video at 10 a.m.

c) The draft Procedural Order and Issues List is hereby attached as Schedule 1 and will serve to initially guide the proceedings of the Merit Hearing.

d) A Final Procedural Order and Issues List shall be submitted to the Case Coordinator on or before Friday, March 29, 2024, should the Merit Hearing proceed as scheduled.

18There will be no further notice.

19The Member is not seized of this matter.

“Steven T. Mastoras”

STEVEN T. MASTORAS

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.

SCHEDULE 1

CASE NO(S): OLT-23-000641

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

Applicant/Appellant: Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit the development of 220, three-storey townhouse units Reference Number: OPA 2022-02 Property Address: Block 2 and 28 of Registered Plan 7M-41 and Part 7 of Lot 5, Concession 2 of Reference Plan 7R5452 Municipality/UT: Mono/Dufferin OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000641 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000641 OLT Case Name: Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation v. Mono (Town)

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

Applicant/Appellant: Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit the development of 220, three-storey townhouse units Reference Number: ZBA 2022-02 Property Address: Block 2 and 28 of Registered Plan 7M-41 and Part 7 of Lot 5, Concession 2 of Reference Plan 7R5452 Municipality/UT: Mono/Dufferin OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000642 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000641

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.

Preliminary Motion

2. A motion shall be heard by video hearing that will begin Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 10 a.m. at https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/927921077 and proceed under Rule 10 of the Tribunal Rules.

3. The motion shall continue for a second consecutive day on Friday, January 26, 2024 at 10 a.m. at https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/927921077.

4. The issue for determination in the motion is whether the application and appeal are premature or beyond the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, and the appropriate relief or order should there be a finding of prematurity or lack of jurisdiction.

5. The organization and scheduling of the hearing (set out in paragraphs 6 to 29 inclusive) is in no way an acknowledgement of the outcome or the merits of the motion, nor the appropriate relief should there be a finding of prematurity or lack of jurisdiction.

6. The panel hearing the motion is in no way constrained by the remaining paragraphs in this procedural order to exercise any remedy or relief that may be requested in the preliminary motion and is authorized to amend, or altogether rescind, any or all terms, provisions or dates below.

Organization of the Hearing

7. The video hearing will begin on Monday, June 17, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. at <https://meet.goto.com/943363669> or by phone via the call-in numbers: (Toll Free) 1 888 299 1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373

8. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is twelve (12) 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.

9. The procedural order deadlines are found in Attachment 1.

10. The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 2 (see the sample procedural order for the meaning of these terms).

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. 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

15. 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 Friday, February 2, 2024 (at least 91 days before witness statements are to be filed) in accordance with paragraph 29 below. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without consent of the parties may be grounds for the Tribunal to adjourn the hearing.

16. 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 Tuesday, February 13, 2024 (at least 125 days prior to the start of the hearing) and in accordance with paragraph 29 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.

17. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Friday, April 12, 2024 (at least 66 days prior to the start of the hearing) 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 Friday, April 19, 2024 (at least 59 days prior to the start of the hearing).

18. 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 20 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.

19. 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 20 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 20 below.

20. On or before Friday, May 3, 2024 (at least 45 days prior to the start of the hearing), 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 29 below.

21. On or before Friday, May 3, 2024 (at least 45 days prior to the start of the hearing), a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 29 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

22. On or before Tuesday, May 28, 2024 (at least 20 days prior to the start of the hearing) the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

23. On or before Monday, June 3, 2024 (at least 14 days prior to the start of the hearing), the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 29 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

24. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence within 14 days (Friday, May 17, 2024) after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 29 below.

25. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before Friday, June 7, 2024 (at least 10 days prior to the start of the hearing).

26. 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.

27. 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.

28. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Monday, June 10, 2024 (at least 7 days prior to the start of the hearing) 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.

29. 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.

30. 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
Friday, February 2, 2024 (91 days prior to receiving Witness Statement)	Exchange of Revised Plans
Tuesday, February 13, 2024 (125 days prior to hearing)	Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
Friday March 29, 2024 (80 Days prior to hearing)	Final Issues List filed with the Tribunal
Friday, April 12, 2024 (66 days prior to hearing)	Experts meeting prior to this date, if any
Friday, April 19, 2024 (59 days prior to hearing)	Agreed Statement of Facts, if any
Friday, May 3, 2024 (45 days prior to hearing)	Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements
Friday, May 17, 2024 (14 days after Witness Statement received)	Exchange of Reply Witness Statements (if any)
Tuesday, May 28, 2024 (20 days prior to hearing)	Confirm if reserved hearing dates still required
Monday, June 3, 2024 (14 days prior to hearing)	Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
Friday, June 7, 2024 (10 days prior to hearing)	Finalize Joint Document Book
Monday, June 10, 2024 (7 days prior to hearing)	Hearing Plan filed with the Tribunal
Monday, June 17, 2024	Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT 2

PARTIES:

1. Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation Eileen Costello Aird & Berlis LLP 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800 Toronto, ON M5J 2T9 Tel: 416.865.4740 Fax: 416.863.1515 Email: ecostello@airdberlis.com

2. Town of Mono Jeffrey Wilker 390 Bay Street, Suite 3100 Toronto, ON, Canada M5H 1W2 Tel: 416.868.3118 Fax: 416.868.3134 Email: jwilker@trlaw.com

Stan Floras 390 Bay Street, Suite 3100 Toronto, ON, Canada M5H 1W2 Tel: 416.868.3150 Fax: 416.868.3134 Email: sfloras@trlaw.com

ATTACHMENT 3

ISSUES LIST

NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the OLT or any party that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is either appropriate or relevant to the determination of the OLT at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the OLT at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing. The identification of an issue on this list by a party indicates that party’s intent to lead evidence or argue that the issue is relevant to the proceeding, for the purpose of fairly identifying to the other parties the case they need to meet and shall not be construed as the OLT having jurisdiction over such matters in each circumstance. Accordingly, no party shall advance an issue not identified on the Issues List without leave of the OLT.

Note: Town of Mono’s issues list will be finalized on or before Friday March 29, 2024, provided the OLT’s decision is issued before this date. The issues highlighted below are being engaged as part of the January 25 and 26, 2024 motion hearing and may be scoped.

TOWN OF MONO

1. Does the proposed official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment (“the development proposal”) have regard for matters of provincial interest identified in section 2 of the Planning Act, including but not limited to sections (e), (f), (h), (j), (k), (l), (n), (o), (p) and (r)?

2. Is the development proposal consistent with the PPS 2020, including but not limited to policies 1.1.1 a), b), c), e) g), 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.1.3.1, 1.1.3.2, 1.1.3.4, 1.1.3.6, 1.2.1, 1.2.6, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6.1, 1.6.3, 1.6.6, 1.6.7, 1.6.8, 1.7.1 a), b),c) and 2.2?

3. Is the development proposal in conformity with the A Place to Grow, Growth Plan, August 2020, including but not limited to 1.2.1, 2.2.1., 2.2.5, 2.2.6, 3.2.1, 3.2.6, 3.2.7?

4. Is the development proposal in conformity with the County of Dufferin Official Plan, including but not limited to policies 1.1.5 a), b) e), i), k), and n), 3.2.2, 3.3.1, 3.6.1, 3.7.1, 3.7.4, 3.8, 3.9.1, 5.4.2, 7.1 d), e) and k), 7.2, 7.2.2 and 7.2..2.1 and 7.3?

5. Assuming County OPA #2 is in full force and effect as of the date of hearing what weight should be given by the OLT to these policies?

6. Does the development proposal conform with the Town’s OP, including sections 2, 4.2, 5.1, 6, 10, 11, 24 2), 24 3) and 24 4)?

7. Should the development proposal be dismissed as it is premised on servicing, including a communal wastewater treatment system when:

(a) the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks will not approve a communal wastewater treatment system without the Town executing a responsibility agreement?

(b) the Town’s own experience with existing communal wastewater systems has been negative, including litigation on the system established by this developer on abutting lands?

(c) the Town has not advised that it is prepared to assume such a system as a Town-owned system, nor has the Town advised that it is prepared to execute a responsibility agreement with a condominium corporation?

(d) technical matters and regulatory requirements, that include but are not limited to requirements for the dilution area, effluent concentration targets, leaching bed size and buffer areas, financial information and long term performance have not been satisfactorily resolved?

8. Should the development proposal be dismissed as it is premised on servicing including an extension of the municipal drinking water system when:

(a) no extension has been planned by the Town;

(b) the Town has not approved any such expansion or study of same:

(c) water capacity is not currently available to service the development proposal;

(d) a Class EA has not been commenced to consider such extension including water supply capacity;

(e) sourcewater protection requirements have not been addressed?

(f) technical matters and regulatory requirements that include, but are not limited to requirements to demonstrate: no adverse effect on the Cardinal Woods municipal wells; water supply for fire protection; provision of adequate supply; provision of water supply of sufficient quality; and protection of drinking and groundwater sources have not been satisfactorily resolved?

9. Is it appropriate and good planning to consider approval of the development proposal of this magnitude absent certainty of water and wastewater servicing?

10. Should this development proposal be considered and evaluated without an associated application to establish the form of tenure – either as a plan of subdivision or by a condominium corporation?

11. Should the appeal be dismissed on the basis that the development proposal is premature?

12. Is the stormwater management proposal acceptable including but not limited to:

(a) Have adequate provisions been made to convey surface drainage under a major storm event?

(b) Has the stormwater management facility been appropriately sized?

(c) Will the drainage adversely impact Highway No. 10, municipal roads and/or abutting properties?

13. Is the development proposal a conversion of an employment area to residential and if so, does it meet the requisite tests and is it justified?

14. Is the development proposal as designated as Special Highway Commercial (10(4)) and zoned as Highway Commercial -4 (CH-4) being a proposed conversion to residential justified?

15. Is there a need for such conversion, considering both the County and Town land needs, and will the development proposal adversely impact both existing and planned commercial development in the Town?

16. Does the proposed density, housing type, built form and lot layout/fabric reflect, the community character of Mono?

17. Have adequate arrangements been made for berming, tree planting or landscaping to address compatibility, including noise mitigation, with Highway 10?

18. Will the development proposal for residential development have noise incompatibility with County Road 16 and Highway 10?

19. Is the proposal too dense for the site, given the servicing constraints and community character and surrounding uses?

20. Are sufficient recreational, parks or amenity facilities proposed in the OPA and rezoning?

21. Is the supporting Transportation study adequate and are the proposed access points and sight lines satisfactory to the Ministry of Transportation and the municipalities?

ATTACHMENT 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation
2. Town of Mono
3. Aragon (Hockley) Development (Ontario) Corporation (in reply, if necessary)

ATTACHMENT 5 PURPOSE OF THE PROCEDURAL ORDER AND MEANING OF TERMS

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.