ADM Agri-Industries Company v. Midland (Town), 2025 CanLII 121088

Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: November 18, 2025

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-003368 (Formerly PL200391)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended

Appellant: ADM Agri-Industries Company

Appellant: Ed Boyd and Gloria Campbell

Appellant: Hanson Development Group

Appellant: Midland Bay Estates Inc.; and others

Subject: Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. MD-OP-1901

Municipality: Town of Midland

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-003368

Legacy Case No.: PL200391

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-003368

Legacy Lead Case No.: PL200391

OLT Case Name: ADM Agri-Industries Company v. Midland (Town)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 9(1) of the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021, S.O. 2021, c. 4, Sched. 6

Request by: Town of Midland

Request for: Production regarding the appeal by ADM Agri-Industries Company

Heard: June 13, 2025 by video hearing Additional Submissions on November 7, 2025 by Video

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel

ADM Agri-Industries Company (“ADM”)

Calvin Lantz

Town of Midland (“Town”)

Bruce Engell

DECISION DELIVERED BY A. SAUVE AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1The Town of Midland (“Town”) brought this Motion for the production of certain documents that are in the possession of ADM Agri-Industries Company (“ADM”). The following are the relief being sought:

1. An order compelling ADM to produce the records identified in the list in paragraph 3 (“documents”) within 10 days of the Tribunal’s issuance;

2. An order that the Town, its lawyer and any of the Town’s consultants working on this matter keep the documents and any further exchange of information or documents which flows from the production of the documents confidential;

3. An order that the parties cannot file the Requested Records with the Tribunal or file information that refers to or is based on the Requested Records except:

(i) under seal;

(ii) pursuant to a further order of the Tribunal; or

(iii) with ADM’s consent;

4. Leave to have this motion heard in writing; and

5. Such further and other relief as counsel may advise and this Tribunal permit.

2ADM is consenting to the Tribunal granting this Motion but will not produce the documents voluntarily due to privacy concerns.

3The records being requested are:

1. ADM’s Environmental Activity and Sector Registry registration, Registration Number: R-010-8110641575 – last updated May 9, 2024;

2. ADM Agri-Industries Company, Midland, Ontario, Acoustic Assessment Report, dated March 11, 2021, prepared by RWDI Air Inc. [includes a version of the Noise Abatement Action Plan];

3. ADM’s Area of Influence CADNA Model: ADM Midland_2024-10-21_Planning_Compliance; and

4. ADM’s CADNA Model exchanged with developers for the purpose of assessing compatibility.

BACKGROUND

4Following the adoption of the Midland Official Plan (“OP”) by Town Council in November 2019, the OP was approved with modifications by the County of Simcoe (“County”) in its capacity as approval authority, on August 11, 2020. It was subsequently appealed to this Tribunal by seven appellants, including ADM.

5ADM is the owner and operator of a grain handling facility and flour mill located on the waterfront at 202 First Street (“subject land”).

6One aspect of ADM’s appeal relates generally to protecting the subject land and the industry located thereon from land use incompatibility, especially concerning noise emissions.

7On October 1, 2021, the Tribunal ordered the partial approval of the Midland OP, save and except for those policies and Schedules that remain under appeal on a site-specific or area-specific basis.

8This Tribunal’s Order, issued October 1, 2021, scoped the ADM appeal to be both policy and area specific.

9All other appeals to the OP have been resolved.

MOTION

10After this Motion date was set the Parties asked if the Motion could be heard in writing, as it is on consent, but administratively there was not enough time.

11The Tribunal marked the Motion record as the only Exhibit. Contained in the Motion record was the Affidavit of Steve Farquharson, the Executive Director of Community and Growth for the Town. Mr. Farquharson is also a professional planner, and the Tribunal found that he is qualified to tender expert opinion evidence in the field of land use planning for this Motion.

12His evidence was that the Town requires this Order for the requested documents because the requested documents relate to noise impact analysis documents which ADM has prepared for reasons other than this Planning Act appeal and which ADM keeps confidential, except in relation to required filings with regulatory authorities.

13Mr. Farquharson went on to state that the Town requires the requested documents because they contain the data that is necessary and relevant to the Town's ability to address ADM's appeal and assist the Tribunal by putting forward the Town's position on ADM's appeal. Also, he informed the Tribunal that the Town has retained R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited (“R.J. Burnside”), to assist the Town with a review the Requested Records and issues relating to noise impacts.

14ADM has refused to produce the requested documents to the Town, Mr. Farquharson opined, because of concerns that the Town would not, under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, be able to maintain the confidentiality of those documents. It is Mr. Farquharson’s understanding that ADM is concerned that the release of the requested documents, for purposes other than dealing with this appeal, would harm its business and commercial interests.

15Mr. Farquharson informed the Tribunal that ADM proposed to release the requested documents only to R. J. Burnside, subject to a non-disclosure agreement, however, that non-disclosure agreement would prevent R. J. Burnside from disclosing the Requested Records or information from them to Town staff or the Town's lawyers, thereby largely defeating the purpose for which the Town needs those documents.

16Mr. Farquharson opined that the requested documents would assist in resolving the ADM appeal, ADM has cooperated by identifying the documents to be requested and that ADM’s concerns about the confidentiality of the requested documents can be appropriately addressed by using the language and provisions that the Parties are requesting the Tribunal use in it’s Decision on this Motion.

17Rule 9.1 states:

9.1 Order for Discovery

The Tribunal may make an order for discovery for a party to obtain necessary information from another party. Such an order will be made only on motion and only if the party has requested information and it has been refused or no answer has been received. The notice of motion shall be accompanied by an affidavit, which sets out the efforts made to obtain the desired information and the reasons that demonstrate that the information sought is both necessary and relevant to the disposition of the issues in the proceeding. The Tribunal may order:

a. any person to provide an affidavit containing a list of relevant documents in the possession of the person;

b. the delivery of relevant documents;

c. an examination or cross-examination of any person or party;

d. an examination for discovery by written questions;

e. the inspection and testing of property;

f. the examination of a witness before the commencement of a proceeding (under the Rules of Civil Procedure);

g. any other form of discovery; and

h. that conditions be imposed concerning the timing and scope of discovery.

18Rule 22.2 states:

22.2 Confidentiality Orders

The Tribunal may order that any document filed in a proceeding be treated as confidential and not be disclosed to the public where the Tribunal is of the opinion that:

a. matters involving public security may be disclosed; or

b. the document contains information regarding intimate financial or personal matters or other matters that are of such a nature that the public interest or the interest of the person affected outweighs the desirability of adhering to the principle that documents filed in a proceeding be available to the public.

19The Tribunal finds that since the requested documents are not publicly available and ADM has not agreed to provide them to the Town, the Town has satisfied the requirements of Rule 9.1 and is unable to obtain the requested documents through other means.

20However, the Confidentiality Order that the Parties are requesting on consent cannot be made under Rule 22.2 as the documents in question are not to be filed with the Tribunal.

21Rule 1.4 states:

1.4 Matters Not Dealt With in the Rules The Tribunal may at any time in a proceeding before it make orders and direct practices and procedures that offer the best opportunity for a fair, just, expeditious and cost-effective resolution of the merits of the proceeding and may exercise any of its powers under the OLT Act, the SPPA, or other applicable legislation. If these Rules do not provide for a matter of procedure, the Tribunal may adopt or follow the procedures set out in the Rules of Civil Procedure where appropriate and do whatever is necessary to adjudicate effectively and completely to resolve the merits of any dispute on any matter. If the Tribunal does not provide for a particular form, then the Tribunal may adopt, or modify the applicable form in the Rules of Civil Procedure to apply to any proceeding before the Tribunal.

22The Tribunal finds that for a fair, just, expeditious and cost-effective resolution to this proceeding the documents in question must be viewed by all of the Parties and that ADM does not wish the documents to be made public for various reasons. The Tribunal also notes that this Motion is on consent and it is a joint request that the Tribunal enact the relief sought in Paragraph 1 of the Decision in order to resolve this matter. As such, the Tribunal was directed to Rule 30.1.01(3) and 30.1.01(5) of the Rules of Civil Procedure (“ROCP”), which state:

30.1.01 (1) This Rule applies to,

(a) evidence obtained under,

(i) Rule 30 (documentary discovery),

(ii) Rule 31 (examination for discovery),

(iii) Rule 32 (inspection of property),

(iv) Rule 33 (medical examination),

(v) Rule 35 (examination for discovery by written questions); and

(b) information obtained from evidence referred to in clause (a). O. Reg. 61/96, s. 2; O. Reg. 627/98, s. 3.

(2) This Rule does not apply to evidence or information obtained otherwise than under the rules referred to in subrule (1). O. Reg. 61/96, s. 2.

Deemed Undertaking

(3) All parties and their lawyers are deemed to undertake not to use evidence or information to which this Rule applies for any purposes other than those of the proceeding in which the evidence was obtained. O. Reg. 61/96, s. 2; O. Reg. 575/07, s. 4.

23The Tribunal finds that the s. 30.1.01 (1) and 30.1.01(3) of the ROCP allows for the Tribunal to craft a confidentiality Order that can enact the relief sought by the Parties found in Paragraph 1 of this Decision.

24The Tribunal grants the Motion and finds that what the Parties have proposed represents good planning and supports a fair, just, expeditious and cost effective resolution to this proceeding.

ORDER

25THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the motion for discovery brought by the Town of Midland is granted and that ADM Agri-Industries Company is to provide the Town of Midland the documents identified in Schedule A within 10 days of the issuance of this Order;

26THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the Town, its lawyer and the Town’s consultants working on this matter keep the records listed in Schedule A of this Decision, and any further exchange of information or documents which flows from the production of the records, confidential;

27THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the records or any information that refers to or is based on the records shall not be filed with the Tribunal except: (i) under seal; (ii) pursuant to a further order of the Tribunal; or (iii) with ADM Agri-Industries Company’s consent; and

28THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT the Tribunal can be spoken to if there are any issues arising from the implementation of this Order

“A. Sauve”

A. SAUVE

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 A

REQUESTED RECORDS

1. ADM’s Environmental Activity and Sector Registry registration, Registration Number: R-010-8110641575 – last updated May 9, 2024;

2. ADM Agri-Industries Company, Midland, Ontario, Acoustic Assessment Report, dated March 11, 2021, prepared by RWDI Air Inc. [includes a version of the Noise Abatement Action Plan;

3. ADM’s Area of Influence CADNA Model: ADM Midland_2024-10-21_Planning_Compliance; and

4. ADM’s CADNA Model exchanged with developers for the purpose of assessing compatibility.