Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: February 10, 2025 CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000942

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

Applicant/Appellant: 4158 Kingston Road, Inc. c/o North American Development Group Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To facilitate 20-storey mixed-use building containing 320 dwelling units with retail at grade Reference Number: 22 168468 ESC 24 OZ Property Address: 4158 to 4180 Kingston Road and 8 to 12 Overture Road Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000942 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000942 OLT Case Name: North American Development Group v Toronto (City)

Heard: February 3, 2025 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

4158 Kingston Road Inc. c/o North American Development Group (“Appellant”)

Counsel

Jonathan Cheng Patrick Duffy

Parties

City of Toronto (“City”)

Counsel

Ariel Lo-Wong Jessica Braun (in absentia)

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY W. DANIEL BEST ON FEBRUARY 3, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This Decision arises from the second Case Management Conference (“CMC”) for the above-noted matter. The Appellant has appealed under s. 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, for the non-decision of the City regarding a Zoning By-law Amendment concerning the municipal address of 4158 to 4180 Kingston Road and 8 to 12 Overture Road, in the City (“Subject Site”).

2The Appellant’s proposal is to redevelop the Subject Site with a 20-storey mixed-use project, including 320 dwelling units (comprised of 120 one-bedroom units, 94 one-bedroom plus den units, 74 two-bedroom units, and 32 three-bedroom units), 106 car parking spaces, 252 bicycle parking spaces with retail space along both street frontages.

3The Parties have been working collaboratively and have presented a draft Procedural Order (“PO”) along with scoped Issues List (“IL”) for the consideration of the Tribunal. It is the Parties’ intention to continue discussions.

4The Tribunal requested that a revised draft PO be submitted, on consent, to ensure that the Issues of all Parties are included, and that the appropriate dates for the exchange of documents and meetings of expert witnesses are reflected. The City was directed to submit the revised draft PO before Friday, February 7, 2025, to the Case Coordinator.

5Having the benefit of receiving the submitted revised draft PO from the Appellant prior to the issuance of this Decision, and having examined the IL attached to the PO, the Tribunal deems the attached PO to be in of force and effect to govern the proceedings at the Hearing of the Merits scheduled below. Any changes to the PO will require the approval of the Tribunal.

6Based on the discussions during the CMC regarding the scope of the Issues and the expected number of witnesses each Party will rely on, the Tribunal determined that it would be reasonable to schedule the Hearing of the Merits for ten (10) days.

7The Tribunal inquired as to whether there were any other matters to be addressed which might assist in the fair, just and expeditious resolution of this matter. The Parties indicated there were none.

8A ten (10) day Hearing of the Merits is scheduled to proceed by video on Monday, November 24, 2025, at 10 a.m.

9Parties and participants are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:

GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/692665589

Access code: 692-665-589

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 GoTo Meeting 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 it by calling into an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (toll free) 1 888 299 1889. The access code is 692-665-589.

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 event to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.

ORDER

13THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS the directions contained in this Decision.

14The Procedural Order, appended to this Decision as Schedule 1, is approved and in force and effect.

15The Member remains available through the Case Coordinator should the need arise, subject to the Tribunal’s scheduling requirements.

“W. Daniel Best”

W. DANIEL BEST

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

Ontario Land Tribunal 655 Bay Street, Suite 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Telephone: (416) 212-6349 Toll free: 1-866-448-2248 Website: olt.gov.on.ca

Tribunaux de l’aménagement du territoire Ontario 655 rue Bay, bureau 1500 Toronto ON M5G 1E5 Téléphone: (416) 212-6349 Sans Frais: 1-866-448-2248 Site Web : olt.gov.on.ca

ISSUE DATE: February 10, 2025 CASE NO.: OLT-24-000942

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

Applicant/Appellant: 4158 Kingston Road Inc. co. North American Development Group Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To facilitate 20-storey mixed-use building containing 320 dwelling units with retail at grade Reference Number: 22 168468 ESC 24 OZ Property Address: 4158 to 4180 Kingston Road and 8 to 12 Overture Road Municipality/UT: Toronto/ Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000942 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000942 OLT Case Name: North American Development Group v. Toronto (City)

PROCEDURAL ORDER

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

The video hearing will begin on Monday, November 24, 2025 in accordance with the following links:

Virtual Link: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/692665589,

Access Code: 692-665-589

Audio-only: (Toll Free) 1 888 299 1889, Access Code: 692-665-589

The length of the hearing will be 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.

The procedural order deadlines are generally found in Attachment 1.

Parties and Participants identified at the Case Management Conference are listed in Attachment 2 to this Order.

The Issues are set out in the Issues List attached as Attachment 3 to this Order. 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.

The order of evidence is 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.

Any person intending to participate in the hearing shall provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal. Any such person who retains a representative must advise the other Parties and the Tribunal of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number.

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 (https://olt.gov.on.ca/tribunals/lpat/).

Requirements Before the Hearing

Expert witnesses in the same discipline(s) shall have at least one meeting on or before Tuesday, September 2, 2025, to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. The experts shall prepare a list of any agreed facts and the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing and provide this list to all of the Parties and the Tribunal on or before Monday, September 15, 2025, if this meeting takes place and if agreement is reached.

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 Monday, July 21, 2025. For expert witnesses, a Party is to identify the area of expertise in which the witness is proposed 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 Tuesday, August 5, 2025.

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, the acknowledgement of expert's duty and curriculum vitae. Copies of this must be provided as in Section 13. 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 Section 13.

On or before Monday, October 6, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and/or expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case co-ordinator and in accordance with Section 24 below.

On or before Monday, October 6, 2025, a participant shall provide copies of their written participant statement to the other parties in accordance with Section 24 below. A participant cannot present oral submissions at the hearing on the content of their written statement.

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 Section 13.

On or before Monday, October 20, 2025, the Parties may provide to all other Parties a written response to any written evidence.

On or before Monday, October 27, 2025, the Parties shall advise the Tribunal of whether any hearings dates scheduled for this matter may be released from the Tribunal's calendar. This request may only be made on consent of all of the Parties. If no hearing dates are intended to be released from the Tribunal's calendar, no Party is required to advise the Tribunal anything further in that regard.

On or before Monday, November 10, 2025, the Parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other Parties. The Tribunal and all Parties shall be notified if a model will be used, all Parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the scheduled commencement of the hearing.

A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal. Such a motion shall be in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rule 10, which requires that the moving Party provide copies of the motion to all other Parties at least fifteen (15) days before the Tribunal hears the motion.

A Party who provides a witness’ written evidence to the other Parties must have the witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the Party notifies the Tribunal at least seven (7) days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record.

On or before Monday, November 17, 2025, the Parties shall prepare and file a detailed Work Plan that identifies the following, at a minimum: the identified Parties participating in the Hearing Event, preliminary matters (if any to be addressed), the date a witness is intended to attend the Tribunal, the identified witness name/expertise, and the approximate time allotted for Examination in Chief, Cross Examination and any re-examination (if any) (the “Work Plan”). The Work Plan should be adhered to guide the Hearing Event to the best ability of all the Parties, and any and all witnesses shall be available on the identified date(s), unless otherwise directed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal may, at its discretion, change or alter the Work Plan throughout the Hearing Event.

The Parties shall prepare a Joint Document Book on or before Monday, November 17, 2025, and which one (1) hard copy will be filed with the Tribunal as soon as practicable in advance of the Hearing. All Parties must be served with the Joint Document Book in paper or an accessible electronic format in accordance with Section 24.

If the applicant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, the applicant shall provide copies of all revised plans, drawings, updated supporting documents and reports, to the other Parties on or before Monday, August 18, 2025. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the Parties may be grounds for a request to adjourn the hearing.

All filing of documents and materials shall be electronic to the Tribunal, the Parties and Participants (if any). The Tribunal will be provided a hard copy of documents and materials in advance of the hearing event as soon as practicable. 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. All documents to be filed with the Tribunal shall be organized, tabbed and digitally searchable and such materials will be filed in accordance with directions contained in the Tribunal’s Video Hearing Guide, dated July 2, 2020, or as may be amended. Section 24 applies regardless if the hearing event is in-person or electronic.

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.

The purpose of this Procedural Order and the meaning of the terms used in this Procedural Order are set out in Attachment 5.

This Member is not seized.

So orders the Tribunal.

BEFORE:

Name of Member:

Date:

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

ATTACHMENT 1 SUMMARY OF DATES

DATE	EVENT
Monday, July 21, 2025	Exchange of witness lists (names, disciplines and order to be called)
Tuesday, August 5, 2025	Last date to challenge identification of expert witness
Monday, August 18, 2025	Last date to provide copies of revised proposal, including all revised plans and drawings (if any)
Tuesday, September 2, 2025	Deadline for Experts’ Meeting to be held
Monday, September 15, 2025	Agreed Statement of Facts
Monday, October 6, 2025	Exchange of Witness Statements, summoned witness outlines, Expert Reports and Participant Statements
Monday, October 20, 2025	Exchange of Reply Witness Statements (if any)
Monday, October 27, 2025	Parties to advise Tribunal if any hearing dates are to be released from the hearing calendar (if any)
Monday, November 10, 2025	Exchange of visual evidence (if any)
Monday, November 17, 2025	Final Work Plan filed with the Tribunal
Monday, November 17, 2025	Finalize Joint Document Book
Monday, November 24, 2025	Hearing commences

ATTACHMENT 2 LIST OF PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

A. PARTIES

1. 4158 Kingston Road Inc. c/o North American Development Group

   Counsel/*Agent

   Patrick Duffy Stikeman Elliott LLP 5300 Commerce Court West 199 Bay Street Toronto, ON M5L 1B9 E-mail: pduffy@stikeman.com Tel.: 416-869 5257

   Jonathan Cheng Stikeman Elliott LLP 5300 Commerce Court West 199 Bay Street Toronto, ON M5L 1B9 E-mail: jcheng@stikeman.com Tel.: 416-869-6807

2. City of Toronto

   Counsel/*Agent

   Jessica Braun Planning & Administrative Tribunal Law Metro Hall 55 John Street, 26th Floor Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 E-mail: jessica.braun@toronto.ca Tel.: 416-392-7237

   Ariel Lo-Wong Planning & Administrative Tribunal Law Metro Hall 55 John Street, 26th Floor Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 E-mail: ariel.lo-wong@toronto.ca Tel.: 416-338-6966

B. PARTICIPANTS

Maria Cichosz 1 Pilot Street Toronto, ON M1E 2C4 Email: maria.cichosz@utoronto.ca Tel.: 416-906-8538

ATTACHMENT 3 ISSUES LIST

NOTE: The identification of an issue on the Issues List does not constitute an acknowledgement by the Tribunal or any Party that the issue, or the manner in which it is expressed, is either appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which an issue is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing.

PROVINCIAL STATUTORY & POLICY REQUIREMENTS

Planning Act

1. Does the proposed development have regard for the matters of provincial interest set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, including but not limited to subsection (p)?

City of Toronto Official Plan

2. Does the proposed development conform with the following policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan:

   a. Avenues (2.2.3)

   b. Healthy Neighbourhoods (2.3.1)

   c. The Public Realm (3.1.1)

   d. Built Form (3.1.2)

   e. Mixed Use Areas (4.5)

   f. The Official Plan Guides City Actions (5.3.1)

   g. Site and Area Specific Policy (SASP) 272

3. Would the proposed development conform with the policy direction of the Council-adopted Official Plan Amendment (OPA) 570 and SASP 641 with regards to the Guildwood GO Station Protected Major Transit Station Area?

City of Toronto Guidelines

4. Does the proposal appropriately and adequately have appropriate regard for the City of Toronto Tall Building Guidelines or Mid-Rise Building Performance Standards, as appropriate?

DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC ISSUES

Planning and Urban Design – Built Form, Site Layout, and Public Realm

5. Is the site organization and built form of the proposed development, including building height, length, mass (including floorplate size), scale, setbacks and stepbacks appropriate?

6. Does the proposal appropriately relate to the area’s existing and planned context?

7. Is the proposed building height appropriate given the existing and planned context?

8. Does the proposal provide for a suitable scale and step down appropriately to the existing Neighbourhoods designation? Does the building provide an appropriate transition to the adjacent Neighbourhoods designation to help mitigate shadow, overlook and privacy?

9. Will the proposal create any adverse wind impacts on the adjacent public realm and surrounding area? How will the proposal mitigate any wind impacts?

10. Does the proposed building represent overdevelopment of the site, with particular regard to the surrounding existing and planned context and would the approval of the development create an undesirable precedent?

11. Is the amount of indoor and outdoor amenity space appropriate and is it located and/or designed appropriately?

12. Is the amount of non-residential (including retail uses) space adequate and is it located and/or designed appropriately?

13. Does the unit size and mix meet the Growing Up Guidelines?

14. Is the proposed landscaping adequate and does the streetscape meet the Streetscape Manual as well as the latest design of the Eglinton East Light Rail Transit (EELRT)?

15. Will the proposal be able to meet all relevant Toronto Green Standards (TGS) requirements?

Transportation Review - Traffic, Access, Parking, and Streetscape

16. Does the proposal provide an appropriate amount of parking (including visitor parking, retail parking, accessible parking, long and short-term bicycle parking)?

17. Are the number of loading spaces and configuration appropriate?

18. Are the driveway and site circulation design functional and safe?

19. Is the proposed Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan appropriate?

20. Will the proposal allow for an appropriate streetscape design?

21. Does the proposal take into consideration the design of the EELRT?

Development Engineering – Grading, Servicing, and Stormwater Management

22. Does the development pose an unacceptable burden on existing municipal servicing infrastructure?

23. Does the existing municipal servicing infrastructure adequately service this proposal?

24. Does the functional servicing submission for the proposed development adequately address what municipal servicing infrastructure improvements are required for the proposed development and area, if any?

25. Will stormwater and groundwater be appropriately managed?

26. Does the proposal meet all solid waste management requirements?

27. Is the proposed construction management plan appropriate?

Urban Forestry – Tree Preservation, Tree Planting and Soil Volume

28. Does the arborist report provide an appropriate tree inventory for the site? Will the proposal meet the City’s tree preservation, soil volume, and tree planting requirements?

29. Will the proposal meet the TGS planting and soil volume requirements?

Good Planning and Public Interest

30. Does the proposed development represent good planning and is it in the public interest?

Draft Zoning By-law Amendments

31. Is the form and content, including regulatory standards, of the proposed draft Zoning By-law Amendments to the City of Toronto By-law No. 569-2013, as amended, appropriate?

Conditions for Final Approval

32. If the development is approved in any form, are the following appropriate as conditions to be satisfied prior to final approval:

a. the form and content of the Zoning By-law Amendment is satisfactory to the Executive Director, Development Review and the City Solicitor;

b. the Owner has at its sole cost and expense:

  i. submitted a revised Functional Servicing Report, Stormwater Management Report, and Hydrogeological Review, including the Foundation Drainage Report or addendums ("Engineering Reports"), to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water;

  ii. secured the design and provision of financial securities for any upgrades or required improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure identified in the accepted Engineering Reports, to support the development, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and the General Manager, Toronto Water, should it be determined that improvements or upgrades are required to support the development, according to the accepted Engineering Reports, accepted by the Executive Director, Development Review and the General Manager, Toronto Water;

  iii. ensured the implementation of the accepted Engineering Reports does not require changes to the proposed amending By-laws or any such required changes have been made to the proposed amending By-laws, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, and the City Solicitor, including the use of a Holding ("H") By-law symbol regarding any new or upgrades to existing municipal servicing infrastructure as may be required;

  iv. submitted a revised Transportation Impact Study or addendum, acceptable to, and to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and the General Manager, Transportation Services, and that such matters arising from such study, be secured if required;

  v. provided a revised Transportation Demand Management plan acceptable to, and to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

  vi. provided a wind study, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

  vii. provided a revised Energy Strategy Report, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Environment and Climate;

  viii. satisfactorily addressed matters from the Urban Forestry, Tree Protection and Plan Review memorandum dated December 11, 2023, or as may be updated, in response to further submissions filed by the Owner, all to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation; and

  ix. made revisions to meet the Toronto Green Standard requirements to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review.

ATTACHMENT 4 ORDER OF EVIDENCE

1. 4158 Kingston Road Inc. c/o North American Development Group
2. City of Toronto
3. 4158 Kingston Road Inc. c/o North American Development Group, in reply (if any)

ATTACHMENT 5

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.