Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: May 23, 2023

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-003954, OLT-22-003975

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

Applicant/Appellant: Nucon Property Development Inc. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal of application Reference Number: 2020-0001 Property Address: 10795 Highway 9 Municipality/UT: Caledon/Peel OLT Case No: OLT-22-003954 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-003954 OLT Case Name: Nucon Property Development Inc. v Caledon (Town)

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

Applicant/Appellant: 2203315 Ontario Corp. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal of application Reference Number: 2020-0003 Property Address: 10819 Highway 9 Municipality/UT: Caledon/Peel OLT Case No: OLT-22-003975 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-22-003975 OLT Case Name: 2203315 Ontario Corp. v Caledon (Town)

Heard: February 10, 2023 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel
Nucon Property Development Inc.	Alexandra Whyte, Quinto M. Annibale (in absentia)
2203315 Ontario Corp.	Alexandra Whyte, Quinto M. Annibale (in absentia)
Town of Caledon	Raj Kehar
Regional Municipality of Peel	Arti Sanichara, Rachel Godley (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BITA M. RAJAEE ON FEBRUARY 10, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This was the second Case Management Conference (“Second CMC”) regarding two Appeals pursuant to s. 34(11) of the Planning Act (“Act”). The first Appeal was by Nucon Property Development Inc. (“Appellant 1”) for the denial of an application for a Temporary Use Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA 1”) by the Town of Caledon (“Town”) for the property municipally known as 10795 Highway 9 (“Subject Property 1”). The second Appeal was by 2203315 Ontario Corp. (“Appellant 2”) for the denial of an application for a Temporary Use Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA 2”) by the Town for the property municipally known as 10819 Highway 9 (“Subject Property 2”).

2The first CMC took place on November 15, 2022 (“First CMC”). Prior to the First CMC, the Tribunal directed that, per Rule 16.3 of the Ontario Land Tribunal Rules of Practice and Procedure, these two appeals would be heard together.

3ZBA 1 is required to permit the existing business office, contractor’s facility, outdoor open storage, and gasoline pump island for a temporary duration of three (3) years. In order to bring the existing uses of Subject Property 1 into conformity with the Town’s Zoning By-Law No. 2006-50, the application proposes to temporarily re-zone it as follows:

Subject Property 1	From:	To:
Rural - Oak Ridges Moraine (A2-ORM)	Rural - Oak Ridges Moraine -Temporary XX (EPA2-ORM-TXX)
Environmental Policy Area 2 Zone – Oak Ridges Moraine (EPA2-ORM)	Environmental Policy Area 2 Zone – Oak Ridges Moraine -Temporary XX (EPA2-ORM-TXX)

4ZBA 2 is required to renew the discontinued use of a motor vehicle gas bar with an accessory retail store, in addition to adding a restaurant use for a temporary duration of three (3) years. In order to renew the discontinued uses and add a restaurant use to the Subject Property 2, the application proposes to temporarily re-zone it as follows:

Subject Property 2	From:	To:
Rural - Oak Ridges Moraine - Exception 450 (A2-ORM-450)	Rural - Oak Ridges Moraine - Temporary XXX (A2-ORM-TXX)
Rural - Oak Ridges Moraine - Exception 450 - Environmental Policy Area (A2-ORM-450-E)	Rural - Oak Ridges Moraine - Temporary XXX - Environmental Policy Area (A2-ORM-TXX-E)

ISSUES WITH NOTICE

5At the First CMC, the Tribunal was informed by Kathleen Wilson, a neighbouring resident seeking Participant status, that there had been an issue with the notice and that at least five individuals who were on the list to receive Notice via email did not receive it. There were several local residents present at the First CMC, and at least one resident, Cheryl Connors, stated that she had intended to seek status but did not receive Notice and thereby missed the deadline to submit the Status Request form. Counsel for the Town expressed concern that there might be others who did not receive Notice and who might have sought status. Thus, at the First CMC, the Tribunal determined, out of an abundance of caution, that another CMC would be held, with Notice re-issued.

6Accordingly, the Second CMC proceeded with Notice on February 10, 2023. The Tribunal confirmed that Notice was given for each proceeding, and marked the following:

a. Exhibit 1 – Affidavit of Service of Notice of the Second CMC for OLT-22-003954, sworn by Roberta Green on January 9, 2023

b. Exhibit 2 – Affidavit of Service of Notice of the Second CMC for OLT-22-003975, sworn by Roberta Green on January 9, 2023

7Subsequent to service of the Notice, four Notice packages were returned as undelivered. Notice was re-sent to those addresses by Purolator Courier but could not be delivered, as the street numbers could not be found by the courier. The Tribunal marked the following:

a. Exhibit 3 – Supplementary Affidavit of Service of Notice of the Second CMC for OLT-22-003954, sworn by Roberta Green on February 3, 2023

b. Exhibit 4 – Supplementary Affidavit of Service of Notice of the Second CMC for OLT-22-003975, sworn by Roberta Green on February 3, 2023

8Despite the four addresses that could not be found, the Tribunal is satisfied that adequate Notice for these proceedings has been provided, and no further Notice is required.

REQUESTS FOR STATUS

9At the First CMC, Party status was granted to the Regional Municipality of Peel (“Region”). Also at the First CMC, Participant status was granted to Kathleen Wilson, Michael Del Bianco, Udeyveer Kabuli, and Cheryl Connors.

10At the Second CMC, the Tribunal was tasked with adjudicating the following Party and Participant Status Requests.

11A Party Status Request was received from Tonia Greco, who raised concerns about the negative impact of the development of the land on her family’s health and safety, as well as environmental concerns. Ms. Greco was not represented and the Tribunal provided her with a fulsome explanation of the difference between Party status and Participant status. Ms. Greco then asked to change her Party status request to a Participant status request. After a review of her request, and with no objection from the Parties, the Tribunal granted Participant status to Ms. Greco.

12At the CMC, Participant Status requests were received from Richard Zabehlicky and Dino Diarmo. They raised concerns regarding the impact of the development on their health, on their children’s health, and on the future health of this area. The Tribunal found that both had an interest in the matter and would assist the Tribunal in understanding the potential impacts of the Proposal on the local community. The Tribunal, on consent of the Parties, granted Participant Status to Mr. Zabehlicky and Mr. Diarmo.

DRAFT PROCEDURAL ORDER AND ISSUES LIST

13The Parties produced a draft Procedural Order (“PO”) and Issues List (“IL”), which were reviewed at the CMC.

14There were discussions with respect to Issue 7 and whether conformity with the new Region of Peel Official Plan was applicable in this case or whether the old Region of Peel Official Plan was to be considered, as outlined in Issue 6. The Parties agreed to have discussions subsequent to the CMC and to update the IL accordingly.

15The Appellants undertook to revise and re-submit for approval of the Tribunal, on or before March 24, 2023, a revised PO and IL in accordance with the Tribunal’s directions and any agreement made amongst the Parties. The Appellants have now provided the updated IL and PO, attached to this Decision, which will govern this proceeding.

MEDIATION AND SETTLEMENT

16The Tribunal raised the issue of opportunities for settlement discussions, including the use of Tribunal-assisted mediation. The Appellants informed the Tribunal that no discussions had taken place to date. The City and the Region advised that the nature of the Applications – namely, appeal of a Temporary Use By-law rather than a Rezoning Application – made it difficult to mediate or discuss a potential settlement as the City’s position was that this is an inappropriate mechanism to implement the requested uses.

17The Parties are directed to advise the Tribunal in writing should they reach a settlement with respect to some or all of the issues prior to the hearing, and, should they wish to pursue Tribunal-assisted mediation, they may make a written request to the Tribunal through the Case Coordinator for those services.

HEARING DATE

18Given the number of Parties and potential issues, the Tribunal agreed that a six (6) day Hearing would be sufficient.

19Ms. Whyte, Counsel to the Appellants, advised that her co-Counsel, Mr. Annibale, is scheduled for a six (6) month Hearing before the Tribunal on another matter, scheduled to occur between June and December of 2023. However, the Appellants wanted Mr. Annibale specifically to represent them. As such, the Appellants requested that the Hearing date for this matter be scheduled to proceed during or after January 2024.

20The City and the Region objected to such a timeline, and submitted that:

a. the Applications at issue are to legalize a use which is currently ongoing. As such, delaying the Hearing by approximately one year or more would mean that the Appellants could continue their uses of the Subject Property for that additional amount of time, which would effectively result in an implicit license. Thus, it was in the public interest that this Hearing occur at the earliest possible time. Allowing the current use to continue while all Parties await a Decision on the legality of use would be prejudicial to the public; and

b. while the Appellants have the right to their choice of representation, they are exercising that right through Mr. Annibale’s co-Counsel, Ms. Whyte, or, in the alternative, through a number of very capable Counsel who work with Mr. Annibale and Ms. Whyte at their firm.

21The Tribunal agreed, and found that, in this case, public interest outweighed the Appellants’ right to specific Counsel from the firm that represents them, especially in light of the fact that they are currently represented by at least two members of that firm and others can assist.

22Accordingly, a Video Hearing of six (6) days was scheduled to proceed at 10 a.m. on Monday, August 14, 2023 continuing to Monday, August 21, 2023.

23Parties are asked to log in to the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/709076365

Access code: 709-076-365

24Parties 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.

25Persons 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: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll Free): 1-888-299-1889. The access code is 709-076-365.

26Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the Hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the Hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.

ORDER

27THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS as follows:

a. Participant status is granted to: Tonia Greco, Richard Zabehlicky, and Dino Diarmo.

b. The Procedural Order and Issues List, attached as Schedule A to this Decision, shall govern the proceedings.

c. The Video Hearing in this matter will commence at 10 a.m. on Monday, August 14, 2023 with six (6) days having been set aside.

28There will be no further notice.

29The Member is not seized but may be available for Case Management should procedural issues arise and scheduling permit.

“Bita M. Rajaee”

BITA M. RAJAEE

MEMBER

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.

SCHEDULE A

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-003954 OLT-22-003975

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

Applicant/Appellant: Nucon Property Development Inc. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal of application Reference Number: 2020-0001 Property Address: 10795 Highway 9 Municipality/UT: Caledon/Peel OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003954 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003954 OLT Case Name: Nucon Property Development Inc. v. Caledon (Town)

To be heard with

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

Applicant/Appellant: 2203315 Ontario Corp. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal of application Reference Number: 2020-0003 Property Address: 10819 Highway 9 Municipality/UT: Caledon/Peel OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003975 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003975 OLT Case Name: 2203315 Ontario Corp. v. Caledon (Town)

PROCEDURAL ORDER

1. The Tribunal may vary or add to the directions in this procedural order at any time by an oral ruling or by another written order, either on the parties’ request or its own motion.

Organization of the Hearing

2. The video hearing will begin on August 14, 2023 at 10_ a.m./p.m. at _______________________.

3. The parties’ initial estimation for the length of the hearing is _6 days. The parties are expected to cooperate to reduce the length of the hearing by eliminating redundant evidence and attempting to reach settlements on issues where possible.

4. The parties and participants identified at the case management conference are set out in Attachment 1.

5. The issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 2. There will be no changes to this list unless the Tribunal permits, and a party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it.

6. The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 3 to this Order. The Tribunal may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on the parties’ consent, subject to the Tribunal’s approval, or by Order of the Tribunal.

7. Any person intending to participate in the hearing should provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal as soon as possible – ideally before the case management conference. Any person who will be retaining a representative should advise the other parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number as soon as possible.

8. Any person who intends to participate in the hearing, including parties, counsel and witnesses, is expected to review the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, available on the Tribunal’s website.

Requirements Before the Hearing

9. A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Tribunal and the other parties a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before May 31, 2023 and in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A party who intends to call an expert witness must include a copy of the witness’ Curriculum Vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified.

10. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before June 6, 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 June 20, 2023.

11. An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, which shall list any reports prepared by the expert, or any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in paragraph 13 below. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Tribunal may refuse to hear the expert’s testimony.

12. Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert’s evidence as in paragraph 13 below. A party who intends to call a witness who is not an expert must file a brief outline of the witness’ evidence, as in paragraph 13 below.

13. On or before June 20, 2023 the parties shall provide copies of their [witness and] expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

14. On or before June 20, 2023 a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement, unless ordered by the Tribunal.

15. On or before July 10, 2023 the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

16. On or before June 30, 2023, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below. If a model will be used, all parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing.

17. Parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case co-ordinator a written response to any written evidence within twenty (20) days after the evidence is received and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

18. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case co-ordinator on or before August 4, 2023.

19. A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. See Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules with respect to Motions, which requires that the moving party provide copies of the motion to all other parties 15 days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

20. A party who provides written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the party notifies the Tribunal at least 7 days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.

21. The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before August 7, 2023 with a proposed schedule for the hearing that identifies, as a minimum, the parties participating in the hearing, the preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the anticipated order of evidence, the date each witness is expected to attend, the anticipated length of time for evidence to be presented by each witness in chief, cross-examination and re-examination (if any) and the expected length of time for final submissions. The parties are expected to ensure that the hearing proceeds in an efficient manner and in accordance with the hearing plan. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the hearing plan at any time in the course of the hearing.

22. All filings shall be submitted electronically and in hard copy. Electronic copies may be filed by email, an electronic file sharing service for documents that exceed 10MB in size, or as otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The delivery of documents by email shall be governed by the Rule 7.

23. 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

PARTIES

1. Nucon Property Development Inc. / 2203315 Ontario Corp. Loopstra Nixon LLP 135 Queens Plate Drive, Suite 600 Toronto, ON M9V 6V7 Quinto M. Annibale / Alexandra Whyte Email: qannibale@loonix.com / awhyte@loonix.com Tel: 416-748-4757 / 416-748-4777

2. Town of Caledon WeirFoulds LLP 1525 Cornwall Road, Suite 10 Oakville, ON L6J 0B2 Raj Kehar Email: rkehar@weirfoulds.com Tel: 416-947-5051

3. Regional Municipality of Peel 10 Peel Centre Drive, Suite B, 6th Floor Brampton, ON L6T 4B9 Rachel Godley Email: Rachel.Godley@PeelRegion.ca Tel: 905-791-7800 ext. 7189

PARTICIPANTS

1. Kathleen Wilson – mkathleen_wilson@hotmail.com
2. Michael Del Bianco – Mdelbianco@alphacove.ca
3. Udeyveer Kabuli – udeyvkabuli@gmail.com
4. Cheryl Connors – cconnors@cnrchome.net
5. Tonia Greco – dpg_19@hotmail.com
6. Richard Zabehlicky – look@thedoberman.ca
7. Dino Diarmo – dinootc@aol.com

ATTACHMENT 2

ISSUES LIST

Note: The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which the issues are appropriate, within the jurisdiction of the OLT, or relevant to the determination at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing.

1. Does the development proposal for: (a) 10795 Highway 9; and (b) 10819 Highway 9, have regard for the matters of provincial interest set out in section 2 of the Planning Act, including but not limited to, subsections 2 (a), (h), (n), (p)?

2. Would a decision to approve the proposed temporary use by-law for: (a) 10795 Highway 9; and (b) 10819 Highway 9, have regard to Town Council’s decision on these applications?

3. Is the proposed temporary use by-law for: (a) 10795 Highway 9; and (b) 10819 Highway 9, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 including but not limited to the policies in section 2?

4. Does the proposed temporary use by-law for: (a) 10795 Highway 9; and (b) 10819 Highway 9, conform with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2020 including but not limited to the policies in section 4?

5. Does the proposed temporary use by-law for: (a) 10795 Highway 9; and (b) 10819 Highway 9, conform with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2017) including but not limited to the plan objectives, and policies in sections 6, 12 and 29 and 30? (Town of Caledon and Region of Peel)

6. Does the proposed temporary use by-law for: (a) 10795 Highway 9; and (b) 10819 Highway 9, conform with the Region of Peel Official Plan including but not limited to the policies in Chapter 2 pertaining to the natural environment, including policies 2.2.9.3.7, 2.3.2.2 and 2.2.9.3.30? (Town of Caledon and Region of Peel)

7. Does the proposed temporary use by-law have regard for the new Region of Peel Official Plan that was adopted by Council on April 28, 2022? (Town of Caledon and Region of Peel)

8. Does the proposed temporary use by-law for: (a) 10795 Highway 9; and (b) 10819 Highway 9, conform with the Town of Caledon Official Plan including, but not limited to:

i. the goals and objectives of the official plan; ii. the designation of the subject site; iii. policy 5.3 of the official plan; iv. policy 6.2.13 pertaining to Temporary Use By-laws; v. the policies of the Palgrave Estate Residential Community Secondary Plan at section 7.1 of the official plan; and vi. the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan policies at section 7.10 of the official plan?

9. What are the existing uses at: (a) 10795 Highway 9 and (b) 10819 Highway 9 and are these uses legal non-complying?

10. Are the proposed uses for: (a) 10795 Highway 9 and (b) 10819 Highway 9, temporary and will they preserve the long term intended use of the subject site?

11. Is the proposed development of: (a) 10795 Highway 9 and (b) 10819 Highway 9 compatible with the surrounding land uses?

12. Does the proposed development of: (a) 10795 Highway 9 and (b) 10819 Highway 9, represent good planning and is it in the public interest to approve?

13. Should an order on the Temporary Zoning By-law amendment for: (a)10795 Highway 9 and (b) 10819 Highway 9, be withheld until the required site plan application is approved?

14. Should an order on the Temporary Zoning By-law amendment for: (a)10795 Highway 9 and (b) 10819 Highway 9, be withheld until the instrument is in a form satisfactory to the Town?

ATTACHMENT 3

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. Nucon Property Development Inc. / 2203315 Ontario Corp.
2. Town of Caledon
3. Regional Municipality of Peel
4. Nucon Property Development Inc. / 2203315 Ontario Corp.

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.