Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: February 22, 2023 CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004636

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

Applicant/Appellant: BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 58 60 Berkeley Corp. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit the development of a 34-storey mixed-use building with ground floor retail and 364 dwelling units Reference Number: 21 235932 STE 13 OZ Property Address: 296-300 King Street East and 56-60 Berkeley Street Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No: OLT-22-004636 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004636 OLT Case Name: Lamb Berkeley Corp. v. Toronto (City)

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

Applicant/Appellant: BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 58 60 Berkeley Corp. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit the development of a 34-storey mixed-use building with ground floor retail and 364 dwelling units Reference Number: 21 235932 STE 13 OZ Property Address: 296-300 King Street East and 56-60 Berkeley Street Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No: OLT-22-004637 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-004636 OLT Case Name: Lamb Berkeley Corp. v. Toronto (City)

Heard: Monday, February 13, 2023 via Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 56 and 60 Berkeley Corp.	Matt Helfand
City of Toronto	Jessica Braun and Adam Ward

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY SHARYN VINCENT ON FEBRUARY 13, 2023 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

1BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 58 60 Berkeley Corp. have appealed against Council’s failure to make decisions within the statutory time frame with respect to requests to amend the Official Plan and zoning applicable to lands known municipally as 296-300 King Street East and 56 and 60 Berkeley Street, all located in the King Parliament Regeneration Area.

2The proposed 34 storey mixed use building, with grade related commercial floor space, incorporates 364 residential units with loading, parking and access to be provided via Pompadour Lane.

3The Affidavit of Service attesting to proper Notice having been given for this proceeding was filed and marked as Exhibit 1.

4The Tribunal was in receipt of a draft Procedural Order complete with preliminary issues which the Parties have agreed to finalize over the week following this proceeding, and for attachment to, and forming part of this Order.

5There were no requests for Party or Participant status, although the owner of 57 and 63 Berkeley Street has indicated an interest in observing the hearing, and accordingly will be provided the necessary login information.

6Counsel for the Parties indicated that discussions on the proposal are in early stages, and in fact it is too early to speak to the potential of pursuing Tribunal lead mediation, other than to concur that the Parties acknowledge the merit of perhaps pursing that course of action in the future.

7Counsel for the City indicated their support of the Appellant seeking hearing dates, but extended the caveat with respect to her availability in the balance of the calendar year.

8A hearing of the merit was therefore scheduled to proceed by video for 10 days commencing at 10 a.m. from Monday, February 5, until Friday, February 16, 2024.

9Parties 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/344779885

Access code: 344-779-885

10Parties 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

11Persons 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: (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889 or +1 (647) 497-9373. The access code is 344-779-885.

12Individuals 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.

13The Member is not seized but may be spoken to should the assistance of the Tribunal be required in the implementation of this Order and the Procedural Order attached hereto, which will govern the proceedings and the prescribed exchanges leading to the hearing.

14No further notice is required.

15So orders the Tribunal.

“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.

ISSUE DATE: February 22, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-004636

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

Applicant and Appellant: BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 58 60 Berkeley Corp Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit the development of a 34-storey mixed use building with ground floor retail and 364 dwelling units Reference Number: 21 235932 STE 13 OZ Property Address: 296-300 King Street East and 56-60 Berkeley Street Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004636 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004636 OLT Case Name: Lamb Berkeley Corp. v. Toronto (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 58 60 Berkeley Corp Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-Law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit the development of a 34-storey mixed use building with ground floor retail and 364 dwelling units Reference Number: 21 235932 STE 13 OZ Property Address: 296-300 King Street East and 56-60 Berkeley Street Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-22-004637 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-004636 OLT Case Name: Lamb Berkeley Corp. v. Toronto (City)

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 February 5, 2024 at 10 a.m.

3. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 10 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 2.

5. 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. An issue can be removed from the issues list without a formal order of the Tribunal with the consent of all Parties.

6. 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.

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. 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 and drawings, to the other Parties on or before 120 days before the hearing is scheduled to commence (on or before October 10, 2023). The Applicant acknowledges that any material revisions to the plans after that date without the consent of the Parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

10. 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 November 7, 2023 (at least 90 days prior to the start of the hearing) 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. Any challenges to the witness, including qualifications of a witness to give opinion evidence in the area of expertise proposed shall be made by motion in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules and notice of same must be served on the other Parties on or before November 17, 2023 (80 days before the hearing is scheduled to commence).

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before December 1, 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 December 7, 2023 (at least 60 days prior to the start of the hearing).

12. 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 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. For greater certainty, each expert witness statement must comply with the minimum content requirements specified in Rule 7 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure. If the expert witness has prepared any report(s) that he/she intends to rely on at the hearing, and which did not form part of the submissions made to the City, such report(s) shall be provided to the other Parties at the same as the delivery of expert witness statements, as in paragraph 13.

13. 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 14 below.

14. On or before December 22, 2023 (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 23 below.

15. On or before December 22, 2023 (date – 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 23 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

16. On or before January 2, 2024 (at least 35 days prior to the start of the hearing) the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

17. On or before January 22, 2024 (15 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 23 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

18. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence within seventeen (17) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 23 below.

19. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before January 26, 2024 (at least 10 days prior to the start of the hearing).

20. 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.

21. 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.

22. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before January 29, 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.

23. All filings shall be submitted electronically and, if required by the tribunal, 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.

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.

BEFORE:

Name of Member:

Date:

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

ATTACHMENT 1

SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE	EVENT
October 10, 2023	Copies of revised proposal, including all revised plans and drawings (if any)
November 27, 2023	Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
December 1, 2023	Experts meeting prior to this date, if any
December 12, 2023	Agreed Statement of Facts, if any
December 22, 2023	Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements
January 8, 2024	Exchange of Responding Witness Statements (if any)
January 2, 2024	Confirm if reserved hearing dates still required
January 22, 2024	Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
January 26, 2024	Finalize Joint Document Book
January 29, 2024	Hearing Plan filed with the Tribunal
February 5, 2024	Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT 2

LIST OF PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

PARTIES:

1. BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 58 60 Berkeley Corp. Aird & Berlis LLP 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800 Toronto, ON M5J 2T9 Eileen Costello Tel: 416.865.4740 Fax: 416.863.1515 Email: ecostello@airdberlis.com Matthew Helfand Tel: 416.865.4624 Fax: 416.863.1515 Email: mhelfand@airdberlis.com

2. City of Toronto Jessica Braun 26th Floor – 55 John Street Toronto ON M5V 3C6 Tel: 416.392.7237 Fax: 416.397.5624 Email: jessica.braun@toronto.ca Adam Ward 26th Floor – 55 John Street Toronto ON M5V 3C6 Tel: 416.394.2787 Fax: 416.397.5624 Email: adam.ward@toronto.ca

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 may be discussed prior to, or 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.

A. CITY OF TORONTO

Planning Act

1. Are the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments consistent with the purposes of the Planning Act as set out in Section 1.1, in particular paragraph (f)?

2. Do the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments have regard for the matters of provincial interest as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, in particular Section 2 (d), (f), and (r)?

3. Would the approval of the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments have regard for the decisions of City Council as required by Section 2.1 of the Planning Act?

Provincial Policy Statement (2020)

4. Are the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) as required by Section 3 of the Planning Act, in particular Section 2.6 (Cultural Heritage and Archaeology) and Policy 4.6?

A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), as amended

5. Do the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments conform with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), as amended, as required by Section 3 of the Planning Act, in particular Section 4.2.7 (Cultural Heritage Resources) and Policies 2.2.2.3 and 5.2.5.6?

City of Toronto Official Plan

6. Do the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan with respect to Built Form (3.1.3 & 3.1.4) and Heritage Conservation (3.1.6)?

7. Do the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan with respect to the currently in-force King-Parliament Secondary Plan, in particular Urban Structure and Building Form (Section 3) and Heritage and Community Improvement (Section 4)?

8. Do the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments have appropriate regard to the Council-adopted King-Parliament Secondary Plan (adopted May 5, 2021), in particular Urban Structure (Section 3), Heritage (Section 4), and Old Town Policy Area (Section 8)?

9. Do the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan with respect to the Downtown Plan Secondary Plan, in particular Land Use and Economy (Section 6) and Built Form (Section 9)?

10. Do the proposed development and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan with respect to Site and Area Specific Policy (SASP) 517 (Downtown Tall Buildings Setback Area Specific Policy)?

Guidelines and Other Implementation Documents

11. Does the proposed development meet the intent and purpose of the King-Parliament Urban Design Guidelines?

12. Does the proposed development meet the intent and purpose of the Tall Building Design Guidelines, particularly the guidelines: 1.1; 1.3; 1.6; 3.1.1; 3.2.3; and 3.2.5?

Zoning By-law

13. Are the proposed minimum building setbacks appropriate?

14. Are the proposed maximum heights on Berkeley Street appropriate?

15. Are the proposed unit mix regulations appropriate?

16. Are the proposed amenity space regulations appropriate?

17. Are the proposed parking regulations appropriate?

18. Are the proposed bicycle parking regulations appropriate?

Heritage

19. Is the proposed development in accordance with the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan as required by Policy 3.1.6.33 of the City of Toronto Official Plan?

20. Does the proposed development conserve the Part V designated heritage property, municipally known as 298-300 King Street East and 56 Berkeley Street as required by Policy 3.1.6.26 of the City of Toronto Official Plan?

21. Does the proposed development conserve the adjacent Part V designated heritage properties municipally known as 528 Adelaide Street East and 70 Berkeley Street, and 359-361 King Street East and 54 Berkeley Street as required by Policy 3.1.6.26 of the City of Toronto Official Plan?

22. Does the proposed development conserve the adjacent listed properties, municipally known as 302-306 King Street East and 53-73 Berkeley Street as required by Policy 3.1.6.26 of the City of Toronto Official Plan?

Urban Design

23. Does the proposed development fit appropriately within the existing and planned context, with regard to its massing, including setbacks, step backs, and separation distances?

24. Does the proposed development provide an appropriate relationship to neighbouring existing and/or planned buildings?

25. Does the proposed development provide an appropriate transition in scale to neighbouring existing and/or planned buildings, in particular, as it impacts Berkeley Street?

26. Does the proposed development represent good urban design?

Site Servicing

27. Does the proposal address the lane widening requirements in Policy 2.2.5(c) of the City of Toronto Official Plan?

28. Is the proposed development supported by a satisfactory Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report that demonstrates that the subject site can be adequately serviced by existing City municipal infrastructure?

29. If no in answer to the immediately preceding issue, has the appellant demonstrated what upgrades and/or improvements are required to the City’s municipal infrastructure to accommodate the proposed development and addressed payment for, design and construction of, such upgrades and improvements, including providing financial securities, entering into and registering an agreement with the City?

Good Planning and Public Interest

30. In light of the foregoing issues, are the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments good planning and would their approval be in the public interest?

Matters to Be Completed Prior to Tribunal Orders

31. If the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order(s) on the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied and the Tribunal receive confirmations from the City Solicitor that:

a) the final form and content of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment are to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

b) the owner has provided confirmation of water, sanitary and stormwater capacity to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, or the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services has determined that holding provisions are required in the Zoning By-law amendment;

c) in the event that improvements or upgrades and/or new infrastructure are required to support the development, the owner has entered into agreement(s) for the construction of any such improvements to such services, as required, at no cost to the City and to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

d) the owner has resolved matters related to the Pompadour Lane widening, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

e) the owner has submitted a revised Heritage Impact Assessment that includes a conservation strategy for the on-site heritage resource, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

f) the owner has entered into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the property at 298-300 King Street East, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, including execution and registration of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor; and

g) the owner has provided a detailed Conservation Plan, prepared by a qualified heritage consultant, that is substantially in accordance with the conservation strategy set out in the revised Heritage Impact Assessment, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

ATTACHMENT 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 58 60 Berkeley Corp.
2. City of Toronto
3. BJL Properties Inc., Lamb Berkeley Corp., and 58 60 Berkeley Corp. (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.

51907671.3