Armfield Estates Inc. v. Toronto (City), 2025 CanLII 12019

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: February 11, 2025

CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000898

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

Applicant and Appellant: Armfield Estates Inc.

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

Description: To permit development of an 11-storey mixed use building with at-grade commercial uses and inset townhouse units for a total of 186 dwelling units

Reference Number: 23 129052 NNY 06 OZ

Property Address: 2801 Keele Street and 6 Paxtonia Boulevard

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000898

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000898

OLT Case Name: Armfield Estates Inc. 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: Armfield Estates Inc.

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

Reference Number: 23 129052 NNY 06 OZ

Property Address: 2801 Keele Street and 6 Paxtonia Boulevard

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000899

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000898

Heard: January 30, 2025 by Video Hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

Armfield Estates Inc.

Rowan Barron Daniel Artenosi (in absentia)

City of Toronto

Ray Kallio

MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C.I. MOLINARI ON january 30, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1This Decision and Order arises from a second Case Management Conference (“CMC”) related to appeals brought under s. 22(7) and 34(11) of the Planning Act (“Act”) by Armfield Estates Inc. regarding the failure of the City of Toronto to make decisions on Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning applications within the timeframe prescribed by the Act for the property located at 2801 Keele Street and 6 Paxtonia Boulevard.

2No requests for Party or Participant status were received ahead of, or during, the CMC.

PROCEDURAL ORDER AND ISSUES LIST

3A draft Procedural Order (“PO”) was submitted to the Tribunal inclusive of an Issues List. The Parties advised that they would submit the final draft PO with the hearing and exchange dates by Thursday, February 6, 2025.

4The final draft PO was subsequently filed with the Tribunal and is attached as approved.

NEXT STEPS

5As requested by the Parties, the Tribunal scheduled a third CMC to be held by video hearing, commencing on Wednesday, June 4, 2025 at 10 a.m. and a ten-day hearing to be held by video, commencing on Monday, November 24, 2025 at 10 a.m. through to Friday, December 5, 2025.

6The video hearings are scheduled to proceed as follows:

Wednesday, June 4, 2025 at 10 a.m. (1-day CMC Hearing) GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/656004293 Access code: 656-004-293 Audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll-Free) 1-888-299-1889 Audio-only access code: 656-004-293 Monday, November 24, 2025 at 10 a.m. (10-day hearing) GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/909787981 Access code: 909-787-981 Audio-only line: +1 (647) 497-9391 or (Toll-Free) 1-888-455-1389 Audio-only access code: 909-787-981

7Parties are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before the hearings begin to test their video and audio connections.

8Parties 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 at: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html.

9Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to it by calling in to the audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll-Free) 1-888-299-1889. The access codes are the same as noted above.

10Individuals 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 at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.

11The Tribunal advised the Parties to ensure that s. 2 of the Act is addressed in the witness statements.

MEDIATION / SETTLEMENT

12The Tribunal advised the Parties of the options for Tribunal-led mediation and/or a written hearing if a settlement is reached, and to contact the Case Coordinator if the need arises.

ORDER

13THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that a third Case Management Conference is scheduled as directed above.

14THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that a ten-day hearing is scheduled as directed above.

15THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Procedural Order appended as Attachment 1 shall govern the proceedings.

“C.I. Molinari”

C.I. MOLINARI

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.

Attachment 1

Ontario Land Tribunal

Procedural Order

CASE NO.: OLT-24-000898

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.

1990, c. P.13, as amended

Applicant and Appellant: Armfield Estates Inc.

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

the requested amendment

Description: To permit development of an 11-storey mixed use

building with at-grade commercial uses and inset

townhouse units for a total of 186 dwelling units

Reference Number: 23 129052 NNY 06 OZ

Property Address: 2801 Keele Street and 6 Paxtonia Boulevard

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000898

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000898

OLT Case Name: Armfield Estates Inc. 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: Armfield Estates Inc.

Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or

neglect to make a decision

Reference Number: 23 129052 NNY 06 OZ

Property Address: 2801 Keele Street and 6 Paxtonia Boulevard

Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto

OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000899

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000898

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 November 24, 2025 at 10:00 am.

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

4. The parties 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.

6. The order of evidence is set out in Attachment 4. 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 shall provide a mailing address, email address and a telephone number to the Tribunal and the other parties. Any person who will be retaining a representative shall advise the Tribunal and the other parties of the representative’s name, address, email address and the phone number.

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 to the other Parties which for the purposes of this paragraph shall consist of revised architectural plans on or before July 25, 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.

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 August 15, 2025 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.

11. Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before August 26, 2025 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 September 10, 2025.

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 October 10, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and the Tribunal and in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

15. On or before October 24, 2025, the parties shall provide copies of their written response(s) to any written evidence to the Tribunal and the other parties in accordance with paragraph 22 below.

16. On or before October 30, 2025, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.

17. On or before November 14, 2025, 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.

18. The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the Tribunal on or before November 12, 2025.

19. A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal in accordance with Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules.

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 November 12, 2025, 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 of the Tribunal’s Rules.

23. No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. Rule 17 of the Tribunal’s Rules applies to such requests.

24. The Tribunal may conduct mediation on consent of all parties, on consent of those parties who wish to participate in mediation, or if the Tribunal sees fit.

25. 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

July 25, 2025

(122 days prior to hearing)

Last date to provide revised plans and drawings (if any)

August 15,2025

(101 days prior to hearing)

Exchange of Witness Lists

August 26, 2025

(90 days prior to hearing)

Experts meeting(s) prior to this date

September 10, 2025

(75 days prior to hearing)

Deadline to File Any Agreed Statement(s) of Facts

October 10, 2025

(45 days prior to hearing)

Exchange of Witness Statements and Experts Reports, and summoned witness outlines (if any)

October 24, 2025

(31 days prior to hearing)

Exchange of Reply Witness Statements (if any)

October 30, 2025

(25 days prior to hearing)

Parties to Advise if Any Hearing Dates Can be Released

November 12, 2025

(12 days prior to hearing)

Filing of Work Plan and Joint Document Book

November 14, 2025

(10 days prior to hearing)

Exchange of Visual Evidence (if any)

November 24 - December 5, 2025

Ontario Land Tribunal Hearing (10 days total)

ATTACHMENT 2

LIST OF PARTIES

A. PARTIES

Counsel/*Agent

Armfield Estates Inc. (Applicant/Appellant)

Daniel Artenosi / Rowan Barron Overland LLP 5255 Yonge Street, Suite 1101 Toronto, ON M2N 6P4 Email: dartenosi@overlandllp.ca / rbarron@overlandllp.ca

Tel: 416-730-0320 / 647-678-7727

City of Toronto

Ray Kallio The City of Toronto, Legal Services Metro Hall, 55 John Street 26th Floor Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 Email: ray.kallio@toronto.ca

Tel: 416-397-4063

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 is either relevant or appropriate. 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 Tribunal 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 Tribunal.

City of Toronto:

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 these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing.

Planning Act

1. Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for the matters of provincial interest as set out in subsections 2(f), (h), (q) and (r) of the Planning Act?

2. Would the approval of the proposed development have regard for any information and material received by City Council, as required by Section 2.1 of the Planning Act?

Provincial Policy Statement (2024)

3. Is the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement (2024), including, but not limited to, the following sections/policies:

   1. 2.4.1.2 c)
   2. 3.2
   3. 3.6.1 d)
   4. 3.6.8 a)

City of Toronto Official Plan

4. Is the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment appropriate and does the proposed development conform with the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan, in particular but not limited to, the following sections/policies:

   1. 2.2: Structuring Growth in the City: Integrating Land use and Transportation
   2. 2.4: Bringing the City Together: A Progressive Agenda of Transportation Change
   3. 3.1.1: The Public Realm
   4. 3.1.3: Built Form
   5. 3.1.4: Built Form – Building Types
   6. 4.1: Neighbourhoods
   7. 4.5: Mixed Use Areas

Built Form and Public Realm

5. Does the proposed development represent good and appropriate land use planning and urban design, having regard to matters such as:

a) Fit with the existing and planned context;

b) The built form, massing and scale, building heights and design, including

the impact on:

(i) The appropriateness of the proposed building height, scale, built form and massing and fit of the development given the size of the site within the existing and planned context

(ii) Whether the proposed floor plate, setbacks, step backs and separation distances are appropriate with regard to shadow and sky view impact on the public realm, High Park and adjacent properties?

(iii) Whether the proposed shadowing is appropriate;

(iv) Gradual transition in relation to the scale and character of the surrounding area, including the building to the east; and,

(v) Skyview and sunlight penetration into the public realm, including streetscape;

c) Providing a well-defined and articulated base building;

d) Providing adequate landscaping and green infrastructure at grade;

(e) Does the proposed development establish appropriate relationships at grade, including provision of adequate space for pedestrian realm, streetscaping, and contributions to public space?

City of Toronto Guidelines

6. Does the proposed development, the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-law Amendment appropriately address the City-wide, Mid-Rise Buildings Performance Standards, with respect to the proposed separation distances?

7. Does the proposed development, the Official Plan Amendment and the Zoning By-law Amendment have appropriate regard for the Complete Streets Guidelines?

Area Structure

Public Realm

8. Does the proposed development establish appropriate relationships at grade, including provision of adequate space for pedestrian realm, streetscaping, and contributions to public space?

Site Organization

9. Is the proposed development appropriately organized to provide a site layout that limits the points of conflict between vehicles and pedestrians, and creates a pleasant environment for pedestrian activity?

10. Does the proposed development promote pedestrian safety and security?

11. Does the proposed site organization, layout and vehicular access support the City’s Complete Streets approach?

Transportation

12. Does the proposed development consolidate and reduce vehicular loading and driveways to provide dedicated areas for pedestrians and open spaces?

13. Does the proposed development appropriately provide for site access and mitigate traffic impacts?

14. Does the proposed development plan for active transportation?

15. Does the proposed development and zoning by-law amendment provide sufficient Travel Demand Management measures, parking and loading for the development?

Servicing and Infrastructure

16. Has it been demonstrated that there is adequate municipal infrastructure in place to support the proposed development? Is there adequate sanitary, storm and water capacity available, and appropriate stormwater and groundwater management?

17. Should a holding (“H”) symbol be imposed on any Zoning By-law Amendment for the lands until such time as sufficient municipal infrastructure is in place to support the proposed development, including any required improvements and/or upgrades to municipal infrastructure?

Tree Preservation

18. Does the development provide the required soil volume to support tree growth in accordance with the Official Plan policies and the Toronto Green Standards?

19. Does the proposed development provide adequate preservation and/or protection of existing trees on the site in accordance with Official Plan policies?

General

20. Does the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment represent good planning and is it in the public interest?

Implementation (order if approved)

21. In the event the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the following conditions are satisfied and the Tribunal receives confirmation from the City Solicitor that:

    1. the final form and content of the draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law amendments are to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Executive Director, City Planning, which amongst other matters much include a holding (H) provision to address municipal servicing;

    2. the owner has satisfactorily addressed matters from Engineering and Construction Services as contained in the Engineering and Construction Services Memorandum dated August 2, 2024, or any outstanding issues raised by Engineering and Construction Services, arising from the ongoing technical review (including provision of acceptable reports and studies), as they relate to the Zoning By-law Amendment application, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

    3. the owner has satisfactorily addressed matters from Transportation Services as contained in the Engineering and Construction Services Memorandum dated August 2, 2024, or any outstanding issues raised by Transportation Services, arising from the ongoing technical review (including provision of acceptable reports and studies), as they relate to the Zoning By-law Amendment application, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and that such matters arising from such Plan be secured as required;

    4. the owner has submitted to the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services for review and acceptance, prior to approval of the rezoning application, a Functional Servicing Report to determine the storm water runoff, sanitary flow and water supply demand resulting from this development and whether there is adequate capacity in the existing municipal infrastructure to accommodate the proposed development;

    5. the owner has made satisfactory arrangements with Engineering and Construction Services and enter into the appropriate agreement with the City for the design and construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure, should it be determined that upgrades are required to the infrastructure to support this development, according to the accepted Functional Servicing Report accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services; and

    6. the owner has provided space within the development for installation of maintenance access holes and sampling ports on the private side, as close to the property line as possible, for both the storm and sanitary service connections, in accordance with the Sewers By-law Chapter 681.10.

    7. the owner has satisfactorily addressed matters from Tree Protection and Plan Review, Urban Forestry Memorandum dated September 4, 2024, or any outstanding issues raised by Urban Forestry, arising from the ongoing technical review (including provision of acceptable reports and studies), as they relate to the Zoning By-law Amendment application, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry & Recreation;

    8. the owner has submitted a revised Travel Demand Management Plan acceptable to, and to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the General Manager, Transportation Services and that such matters arising from such study be secured if required through the implementing zoning by-law amendment and, or Site Plan approval;

    9. the owner has submitted architectural plans reflecting the proposal as approved in whole or in part, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

    10. the owner has submitted an updated complete Toronto Green Standards (TGS) Checklist and Statistics Template, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

    11. Should it be determined that upgrades are required to the infrastructure to support the development according to the accepted Functional Servicing Report and/or the Transportation Impact Study, the City Council direct the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff to request that a Holding provision (H) be included in the final form of the site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment, including entering into appropriate agreement(s) with the City for required mitigation, as well as the design and construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure and the provision of financial securities to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and General Manager, Transportation Services.

ATTACHMENT 4

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

NOTE: Where Parties of like interest have issues in common, they shall make reasonable efforts to coordinate their examinations-in-chief and cross-examinations so as to minimize any duplication or overlap of evidence. The Order of Evidence will be described in greater detail in the Work Plan that is filed with the Tribunal.

1. Armfield Estates Inc. (Applicant/Appellant)

2. City of Toronto

3. Armfield Estates Inc. (if necessary)

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.