Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: May 04, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002653

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1997, c.P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Tesmar Holdings Inc.

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

Description: To permit the development of a 30-storey residential building in Phase 2

Reference Number: OP.21.020

Property Address: Part of Lot 15, Concession 4

Municipality/UT: Vaughan/York

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002653

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002653

OLT Case Name: Tesmar Holding Inc. v. Vaughan (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1997, c.P. 13, as amended

Applicant/Appellant: Tesmar Holdings Inc.

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

Description: To permit the development of a 30-storey residential building in Phase 2

Reference Number: Z.21.041

Property Address: Part of Lot 15, Concession 4

Municipality/UT: Vaughan/York

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002655

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002653

Heard: March 20, 2023 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

Tesmar Holdings Inc.

Meaghan McDermid

City of Vaughan

Bruce Engell

Zaynab Al-Waadh

The Regional Municipality of York

Bola Ogunmefun

Magna International Inc.

Andrea Skinner

Canadian National Railway

Alan Heisey

Rutherford Land Development Corporation

Alexandra Whyte

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY steven t. mastoras and p. tomilin ON march 20, 2023 and order of the Tribunal

INTRODUCTION

1The matter is before the Tribunal because Tesmar Holdings Inc. ("Applicant/Appellant") has filed appeals under s. 22(7) and s. 34(11) (the “Appeals”) of the Planning Act (“Act”) from the failure of the City of Vaughan (“City”) to make a decision within the statutory timeframes specified in these respective sections of the Act.

2This was the third Case Management Conference (“CMC”) to update the Tribunal on the status of the Appeals along with the draft Procedural Order (“PO”) and the Issues List (“IL”) in advance of a scheduled hearing to commence July 31, 2023.

3The Parties advised the Tribunal that they are continuing to work towards a possible settlement of this matter and confirmed at the hearing that there is agreement between the Applicant, the City, and the Regional Municipality of York (“York Region”) relating to both the Appeals, subject to a Holding provision (“H”) on the subject property (“Property”).

4In addition to this, the Tribunal was also advised by Counsel for the Applicant that consideration was being given to the possible consolidation of these Appeals, within the City’s Comprehensive Zoning By-law (Case No. OLT-22-002104) (“CZBL”). All Parties were informed of this additional consideration through the CZBL appeals, and there were no objections.

CMC, PROCEDURAL ORDER, ISSUES LIST, AND HEARING EVENT

5All the Parties agreed to request a further CMC to be scheduled at the direction of the Tribunal in early May 2023, which may be converted to a settlement hearing.

6Furthermore, all Parties also agreed to request adjusting the original hearing schedule with a start date of July 31, 2023, for a total of nineteen (19) days, to a reduced time frame commencing August 8, 2023, for a total length of fourteen (14) days.

7The Tribunal received a Draft Procedural order. Parties were canvased by the Tribunal related to outstanding issues and Counsel for the Applicant advised that while there was agreement with the City and York Region, some additional discussions were ongoing with other Parties relating to more recent noise study updates and other issues, and some additional time was required to seek resolution of such issues, where possible.

8The Tribunal is encouraged by these efforts to achieve settlement and advise all Parties that if Tribunal led mediation efforts are needed, that the Parties notify the Case Coordinator of this request.

9Considering the updates at this CMC, the Tribunal agreed to the request for an additional CMC date to be scheduled for May 17, 2023, at 10 a.m. by video, and that the Tribunal be kept advised regarding progress in the efforts to settle and whether the CMC may need to be converted to a Settlement hearing.

10Parties 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:

Wednesday, May 17, 2023 (CMC Hearing)

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/979388733 Access code: 979-388-733 Audio-only telephone line: 1-888-299-1889 or +1(647) 497-9373 Audio-only access code: 979-388-733

11Parties 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

12Parties 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.

13Parties 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

14Persons 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.

15Individuals 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. 

16The Tribunal also agreed to re-schedule the start date of the hearing event to Tuesday, August 8, 2023, at 10am, via video conference, for a duration of 14-days.

Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 10 a.m. (14 day hearing) GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/914098901 Access code: 914-098-901 Audio-only telephone line: (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889 or +1(647) 497-9373 Audio-only access code: 914-098-901

17Please refer to paragraphs 11 to 15 for the hearing details and instructions.

ORDER

18THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that a fourth Case Management Conference (“CMC”) is scheduled to commence at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, May 17, 2023.

19THE TRIBUNAL ALSO ORDERS that the merits hearing is scheduled to commence at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, August 8, 2023, for 14 days.

20THE TRIBUNAL ALSO ORDERS that the Procedural Order to govern the proceedings received on or before Friday, March 31, 2023, and appended hereto is approved, and is in force and effect at the date of issue of this Decision.

21There will be no further notice.

22The Panel is not seized of this matter.

“Steven T. Mastoras”

steven t. mastoras

MEMBER

”P. Tomilin”

P. TOMILIN

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.

Case No.: OLT-22-002653

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

Applicant and Appellant: Tesmar Holdings Inc.

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

Description: To permit the development of a 30-storey residential building in Phase 2

Reference Number: OP.21.020

Property Address: Part of Lot 15, Concession 4

Municipality/UT: Vaughan/York

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002653

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002653

OLT Case Name: Tesmar Holdings Inc. v. Vaughan (City)

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

Applicant and Appellant: Tesmar Holdings Inc.

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

Description: To permit the development of a 30-storey residential building in Phase 2

Reference Number: Z.21.041

Property Address: Part of Lot 15, Concession 4

Municipality/UT: Vaughan/York

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002655

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002653

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 Tuesday August 8, 2023 at 10 a.m. The length of the hearing is fourteen (14) days.

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

4. The Parties and Participants (see Attachment 5 for the meaning of these terms) 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. With the exception of the elimination or reduction of issues, 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 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. The purpose of this Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in this Procedural Order are set out in Attachment 5.

8. 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, telephone number and (if applicable), fax number, as soon as possible.

9. 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

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 Thursday May 18, 2023 and in accordance with paragraph 23 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.

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before Monday May 29, 2023 and use best efforts to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. Following the experts’ meeting(s), the experts must prepare and the Parties shall file a Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues with the OLT Case Co-ordinator on or before Monday June 5, 2023.

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.

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 Friday 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 23 below.

15. On or before Friday June 16, 2023, 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 Friday July 7, 2023, the Parties may provide to all other Parties and the OLT Case Co-ordinator any written response to any written evidence in accordance with paragraph 23 below.

17. On or before Thursday July 20, 2023, the Parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other Parties and the OLT Case Co-ordinator 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. The Parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT Case Co-ordinator on or before Friday July 28, 2023.

19. Any documents which may be used by a Party in cross examination of an opposing Party’s witness may be provided in a format that is password protected and only accessible to the Tribunal and the other Parties if it is introduced as evidence at the hearing. Any such documents shall be provided prior to the commencement of the cross examination of the witness.

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 draft hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before Tuesday July 25, 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.

23. All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy, if requested by the Tribunal. 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.

These Members are not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

Attachment 1

SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE

EVENT

Thursday May 18, 2023

Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines, and order to be called)

Monday May 29, 2023

Experts meeting prior to this date

Monday June 5, 2023

Experts’ Statement of Agreed Facts and Issues

Friday June 16, 2023

Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements

Friday July 7, 2023

Exchange of Reply Witness Statements

Thursday July 20, 2023

Exchange of Visual Evidence

Tuesday July 25, 2023

Preliminary Hearing Plan filed with Tribunal

Friday July 28, 2023

Joint Document Book filed with Tribunal

Tuesday August 8, 2023

Hearing commences

Attachment 2

LIST OF PARTIES

PARTIES

1. Tesmar Holdings Inc.

Meaghan McDermid Davies Howe LLP The Tenth Floor 425 Adelaide Street West Toronto, ON M5V 3C1 416-263-4514 meaghanm@davieshowe.com

2. City of Vaughan

Bruce Engell WeirFoulds LLP 66 Wellington Street West Suite 4100, TD Bank Tower P.O. Box 35 Toronto, ON M5K 1B7 416-947-5081 bengell@weirfoulds.com

Zaynab Al-waadh Vaughan City Hall, Legal Services 2141 Major Mackenzie Dr. Vaughan, ON L6A 1T1 905-832-2281 Zaynab.al-waadh@vaughan.ca

3. The Regional Municipality of York

Bola Ogunmefun 17250 Yonge Street Newmarket, ON L3Y 621 905-830-4444 ext. 71459 Bola.Ogunmefun@york.ca

4. Magna International Inc.

Andrea Skinner Aird & Berlis LLP Brookfield Place 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800 Toronto, ON M5J 2T9 416-865-3423 askinner@airdberlis.com

5. Canadian National Railway

Alan Heisey Papazian Heisey Myers Barristers & Solicitors 21 King Street West, P.O. Box 105, Suite 510 Toronto, ON M5H 3T9 416-601-2702 heisey@phmlaw.com

6. Rutherford Land Development Corporation

Quinto Annibale and Alexandra Whyte Loopstra Nixon LLP Woodbine Place 135 Queens Plate Drive, Suite 600 Toronto, ON M9W 6V7 416-748-4757 / 416-748-4769 qannibale@loonix.com / awhyte@loonix.com

Attachment 3

ISSUES LIST

The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issues, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing.

ISSUES LIST OF MAGNA INTERNATIONAL INC.

1. Is the proposal, including the proposed official plan amendment, proposed zoning by-law amendment, proposed mitigation and the related plans/drawings, in substantial accordance with the planning instruments and mitigation that apply to the Tesmar property (reference: section 51 of the Minutes of Settlement dated Jan. 25, 2018)?
2. Has the proposal and the proposed mitigation been adequately and appropriately assessed from a technical perspective, taking into account the existing industrial and other uses in the vicinity of the Tesmar property such that, among other things, the proposal’s real and potential impacts are properly understood and addressed?
3. Does the proposal and the proposed mitigation adequately and appropriately address noise and vibration, air quality and lighting concerns, in particular taking into account existing and any future adjacent industrial operations in the vicinity (including Magna’s industrial operation), and does it meet the standards of the Environmental Protection Act, the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) guidelines (including NPC 300) and the City of Vaughan Noise by-law and include mitigation measures that comply with the obligations and/or spirit and intent of the Minutes of Settlement dated January, 25, 2018 between Tesmar Holdings Inc., Rutherford Land Development Corp., Caldari Land Development Corp., Magna International Inc., Granite Real Estate Investment Trust and Granite REIT Inc. and 805062 Ontario Limited, and the City of Vaughan?
4. Have the Minutes of Settlement, including but not limited to sections 14-20 and 44-46, been complied with; and, if not, what conditions, notices or other legal documents are required to ensure that the obligations under, and the spirit and intent of, the Minutes of Settlement are satisfied?
5. What conditions, notices or other legal documentation are appropriate, in conjunction with any approval of the proposal and the proposed mitigation, to ensure the implementation/installation and maintenance of the proposed mitigation and a safe, compatible relationship between the existing industrial and other uses in the vicinity of the Tesmar property (including Magna’s industrial operation)?
6. Have the transportation and traffic impacts associated with the proposed development, including the interaction of truck traffic associated with adjacent properties (including Magna’s industrial operation), pedestrian, and passenger vehicle traffic, been adequately studied; and have provisions been made to secure any mitigation measures that may be appropriate or required, from a transportation/traffic perspective, as a result of the proposed development?
7. Does the proposal have appropriate regard for the provincial interest, in particular as set out in section 2(h), 2(k), 2(o), 2(p), 2(q) and 2(r); is the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in particular policies 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.7 and 1.8; does it conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, in particular policies 2.2 and 2.2.5.8; does it conform to the York Region Official Plan, in particular policies 1.2, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 7.2, 8.3 and 8.4; does it conform to the City of Vaughan Official Plan, in particular policies 1.3, 1.5, 1.7, 2.1, 2.2, 3.7, 4.1-4.4, 5.1, 5.2, 9.1, 9.2, 10.1 and 10.2; does it represent good planning and is it in the public interest?

ISSUES LIST OF CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY

1. Is the proposal substantially in conformity with currently approved OPA and ZBA for the property?
2. Has paragraph 42 and the other provisions of the Minutes of Settlement been complied with, and, if not, what conditions, notices or other legal documents are required to ensure that the obligations under, and the spirit and intent of, the Minutes of Settlement are satisfied?
3. If the answer to Issues 1-2 is no, does the proposal have appropriate regard for the provincial interest, in particular as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act , section 2(h), 2(k), 2(m), 2(o), 2(p), 2(q) and 2(r); is the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, in particular policies 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.6.7-9, 1.7 and 1.8; does it conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, in particular policy 2.2 and 2.2.5.8; does it conform to the York Region Official Plan (April 2019 Consolidation), including, but not limited to, policy 1.2, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5, 7.2, 7.5, 8.3, 8.4, definitions, maps and figures; does it conform to the City of Vaughan Official Plan 2010 (December 2020 Consolidation), including, but not limited to, policy 1.3, 1.5, 1.7, 2.1, 2.2, 3.7, 4.1, 4.4, 5.1, 5.2, 9.1, 9.2, 10.1, 10.2, definitions, figures and schedules; does it conform to the Vaughan Mills Centre Secondary Plan; and, does it represent good planning and is it in the public interest?
4. If the answers to Issues 1-2 is no, has the proposal and the proposed mitigation been adequately and appropriately assessed from a technical perspective, taking into account the existing industrial and other uses in the vicinity of the Tesmar property, including the MacMillan Rail Yard, such that, among other things, the proposal’s real and potential impacts are properly understood and addressed?
5. If the answer to Issues 1-2 is no, what conditions, notices or other legal documentation are appropriate, in conjunction with any approval of the proposal and the proposed mitigation, in addition to those provided for in or by the Minutes of Settlement dated March 3, 2018, are needed to ensure that the implementation/installation and maintenance of the proposed mitigation and a compatible relationship between the MacMillan Rail Yard and the proposal?
6. If the answers to Issues 1-2 is no, do the OPA and ZBA propose mitigation measures which conform to the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (“MECP”) NPC 300 Guidelines and required noise studies?

Attachment 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. Tesmar Holdings Inc.
2. City of Vaughan
3. Region of York
4. Canadian National Railway
5. Magna International Inc.
6. Rutherford Land Development Corporation
7. Reply by Tesmar Holdings Inc. if any

Attachment 5

PURPOSE OF PROCEDURAL ORDER

Case Management Conferences are scheduled by the Tribunal to organize the Hearing. This sample procedural order is provided to identify who may participate in the Hearing, the issues in dispute, and the matters that are required to be carried out before the Hearing. The attachment to this sample procedural order explains the meaning of a number of terms in the sample procedural order, such as a Party or a Participant.

The Tribunal recommends that the appellant, municipality, the applicant (if applicable), or those who wish to seek Party status in this proceeding, meet to discuss this sample procedural order before the date of the Case Management Conference and try to identify the issues and process they want the Tribunal to Order following the conference. The Tribunal will hear submissions on the content of this procedural order at the case management conference and issue a procedural order at a later date.

If you are not represented by a lawyer, you should prepare by reviewing the Appeal Guide matching your appeal type and the Tribunal’s Rules from the Tribunal, which are available on the Tribunal’s website

meaning of terms used in the procedural order

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 Party, and making submissions on all of the evidence. If an unincorporated group wishes to become a Party, 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. Party 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, group, 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). Subsection 33.2 of the Local Planning Appeal 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 Party 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 the witness’ opinions on those issues; and a list of reports 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 for the opinions and (5) a list of reports that the witness will rely on at the Hearing.

A Participant statement is a short written outline of the person’s or group’s background, experience, and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which the Participant wishes to address and the submission of the Participant on those issues; and a list of reports, if any, which the Participant wishes to refer to in their statement.

Additional Information

Summons: A Party must ask a Tribunal Member or the senior staff of the Tribunal to issue a summons. This request must be made before the time that the list of witnesses is provided to the Tribunal and the Party. (See Rule 13 on the summons procedure.) If the Tribunal requests it, an affidavit must be provided indicating how the witness’ evidence is relevant to the Hearing. If the Tribunal is not satisfied from the affidavit, it will require that a motion be heard to decide whether the witness should be summoned.

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 Party of opposite interest;
• re-examination by the Party presenting the witness; or
• another order of examination mutually agreed among the Party or directed by the Tribunal.