Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: December 17, 2025 CASE NO.: OLT-25-000084

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit the construction of 3 mixed-use residential towers Reference Number: 21 196875 STE 09 OZ Property Address: 1799 St. Clair Avenue W Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000084 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000084 OLT Case Name: Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP 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: Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: To permit the construction of 3 mixed-use residential towers Reference Number: 21 196875 STE 09 OZ Property Address: 1799 St. Clair Avenue W Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000085 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000084 OLT Case Name: Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 51(34) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP Subject: Proposed Plan of Subdivision – Failure of Approval Authority to make a decision Description: To permit the construction of 3 mixed-use residential towers Reference Number: 21 196867 STE 09 SB Property Address: 1799 St. Clair Avenue W Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000086 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000084 OLT Case Name: Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP v. Toronto (City)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 114(15) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 11, Sched. A Appellant: Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP Subject: Site Plan Description: To permit the construction of 3 mixed-use residential towers Reference Number: 22 140038 STE 09 SA Property Address: 1799 St. Clair Avenue W Municipality/UT: Toronto/Toronto OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000087 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000084 OLT Case Name: Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP v. Toronto (City)

BEFORE: PAVEL TOMILIN MEMBER Wednesday, the 17th day of December, 2025

THESE MATTERS having come before the Ontario Land Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) for a Case Management Conference on May 16, 2025;

AND THE TRIBUNAL having issued the Order on August 7, 2025, for the purpose of governing the required procedures leading up to the hearing commencing on March 23, 2026;

AND THE TRIBUNAL having adjourned the March 23, 2026 hearing;

AND THE TRIBUNAL having rescheduled the hearing for June 1, 2026;

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS that the Procedural Order, as agreed to between the Parties and attached hereto as Schedule “A”, shall be in force and effect for the purpose of governing the required procedures leading up to and including the hearing, which is scheduled to commence on March 23, 2026. The Tribunal has set aside 9 days for the hearing.

“Matthew D.J. Bryan” MATTHEW D.J. BRYAN REGISTRAR

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

PROCEDURAL ORDER

The Tribunal orders that:

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

A hearing respecting matters under the Planning Act is scheduled to proceed by video as follows:

Date: June 1, 2026 to June 11, 2026 GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/442599157 Access Code: 442-599-157 Audio only telephone line: +1 (888) 455 1389 or +1 (647) 497-9391

The initial estimation for the length of the hearing is 9 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 summarized in Attachment “1” to this Order.
The parties and participants in the hearing as 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 shall be as set out in Attachment “4” hereto. 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 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.
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

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 March 6, 2026, 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, the Acknowledgment of Expert’s Duty form, and the area of expertise in which the witness is prepared to be qualified.
Expert witnesses in the same field shall have a meeting on or before March 13, 2026 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 March 20, 2026.
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 and the curriculum vitae and Acknowledgment of Expert Duty form previously provided in paragraph 13 below. 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. 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 they intend 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 paragraph 13 below.
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.
On or before April 7, 2026, the parties shall provide copies of their witness and expert witness statements to the other parties and to the OLT case coordinator and in accordance with paragraph 22 below or the witness or participant may not give oral evidence at the hearing. Participants are only permitted to provide written evidence to the Tribunal, unless otherwise permitted by the Tribunal.
On or before April 7, 2026, 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.
On or before April 24, 2026, the parties shall confirm with the Tribunal if all the reserved hearing dates are still required.
On or before May 1, 2026, 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.
On or before April 21, 2026, the parties may provide to all other parties and the OLT case coordinator a written response to any written evidence in accordance with paragraph 22 below.
The parties shall cooperate to prepare a joint document book which shall be shared with the OLT case coordinator on or before May 15, 2026.
A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Tribunal, in compliance with Rule 10 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure.
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.
The parties shall prepare and file a preliminary hearing plan with the Tribunal on or before May 1, 2026 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.
All filings shall be submitted electronically unless otherwise directed. 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.
If the applicant intends to seek approval of a revised proposal at the hearing, the applicant shall provide copies of the revised proposal, including all revised plans, drawings, proposed instruments, updated supporting documents and reports, to the other parties on or before February 13, 2026. The applicant acknowledges that any revisions to the proposal after that date without the consent of the parties may be grounds for the Tribunal to adjourn the hearing.
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.

BEFORE: Name of Member: Date:

TRIBUNAL REGISTRAR

ATTACHMENT “1”

SUMMARY OF KEY DATES

Date	Hearing Event
February 13, 2026	Last date to provide copied of the revised proposal, including all revised plans and drawings (if any) – para. 23
March 6, 2026	Exchange of List of Witnesses and the order in which they will be called – para. 9
March 13, 2026	Expert Witness Meeting – para. 10
March 20, 2026	Filing of Statement(s) of Agreed Facts and Issues – para. 10
April 7, 2026	Exchange of Witness & Participant Statements – paras. 13 & 14
April 24, 2026	Confirmation to Tribunal if all reserved hearing dates are still required – para. 15
April 21, 2026	Exchange of Reply Evidence/Statements – para. 17
May 1, 2026	Exchange of Visual Evidence – para. 16
May 15, 2026	Filing of Joint Document Book – para. 18
May 25, 2026	Notification to Tribunal and Parties if witness not to provide oral evidence – para. 20
May 1, 2026	Filing of Hearing Plan – para. 21
June 1 to June 11, 2026	Contested Hearing (if required) – para. 2

ATTACHMENT “2”

PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS

PARTIES

SEQUOIA STOCKYARDS GP INC. AND SEQUOIA STOCKYARDS LP Jason Park / Daniel Angelucci Kagan Shastri DeMelo Winer Park LLP 188 Avenue Road Toronto, ON M5R 2J1 T: 416.645.4572 / 437.782.1348 E: jpark@ksllp.ca / dangelucci@ksllp.ca

CITY OF TORONTO Gabe Szobel / Horatio Waller Planning & Administrative Tribunal Law 26th fl., 55 John Street Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 T: 416.338.1889 / 416.338.1614 E: Gabe.Szobel@toronto.ca / Horatio.Waller@toronto.ca

i2 DEVELOPMENTS (OLD WESTON) INC. Michael Foderick / Jamie Cole McCarthy Tétrault LLP Suite 5300 – TD Bank Tower 66 Wellington Street West Toronto ON M5K 1E6 T: 416-601-7783 / 416-601-7811 E: mfoderick@mccarthy.ca / jpcole@mccarthy.ca

PARTICIPANTS

Alexander Kahn (324 Old Weston Road) T: 416.704.3465 E: alexanderkhan.is@gmail.com

ATTACHMENT “3”

ISSUES LIST

City of Toronto

Planning Act

Does the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment have sufficient regard for the matters of provincial interest identified under Section 2 of the Planning Act, including but not limited to Sections 2 (h), (o), (f), (i), (k), (r), (s)?

Provincial Planning Statement

Is the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement 2024, including but not limited to, Sections 2.2, 2.4.2, 2.8.1, 2.9, 3.5.2, 3.6, 3.9, 6.1, 6.1.5, 6.1.6, 6.1.7)?

City of Toronto Official Plan

Does the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment conform to the City of Toronto Official Plan, including but not limited to, sections 2.2.4, 2.3.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.2. 3.2.3, 3.6, 4.5, 4.6, 5.2?
Does the proposed development, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment conform to the Council Adopted Keele-St. Clair Secondary Plan (OPA 537), including but not limited to Sections 1.2, 1.3, 2.1,2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 3, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5, 4.10, 4.12, 5, 6, 7, 8.1,8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 8.6, 8.12, 9.1, 9.2

City of Toronto Guidelines

Does the proposal respond appropriately to and meet the intent and purpose of:
1. The Tall Building Design Guidelines;
2. Growing Up Urban Design Guidelines: Planning for Children in New Vertical Communities;
3. Pet Friendly Design Guidelines

Toronto Green Standard

Does the proposed developed meet the requirements of the Toronto Green Standard?

Site Specific Issues

Is the site organization and built form of the proposed development appropriate, including:
1. Are the proposed building heights and massing appropriate, and in keeping with the existing and planned context for the site?
2. Is the proposed streetwall and base building massing appropriate and frame the street with appropriate proportion?
3. Does the proposed built form appropriately transition to adjacent Neighborhoods and the public realm, and maximize access to direct sunlight on the public realm?
4. Does the site organization create inviting spaces for pedestrians by providing generous building setbacks, public sidewalks with tree planting and safe and comfortable pedestrian connections?
5. Does the proposal limit negative impact on planned and existing pedestrian movement?
6. Are the shadow impacts from the proposed development appropriate?
7. Are the wind impacts from the proposed development acceptable?
Does the proposal represent good and appropriate land use planning, having regard for:
1. appropriate provision of new parks and open spaces;
2. appropriate provision of new public roads and lanes,
3. appropriate implementation of the St. Clair Avenue West Area TMP;
4. timing of the delivery of the St. Clair-Old Weston SmartTrack Station;
5. adequate municipal infrastructure;
6. appropriate provision of affordable housing;
7. appropriate provision of non-residential uses;
8. appropriate setback from the adjacent rail corridor and derailment protection?
Has a parkland dedication of an appropriate size, location, and configuration been proposed?
Has the proposed development provided adequate number and type of loading spaces to support the development?
Is the proposed vehicular parking supply, including accessible parking supply, appropriate?
Is the proposed bicycle parking supply and facilities adequate to support the development?
Does the Transportation Impact Study demonstrate appropriate TDM, site circulation, access, parking, loading and related concerns in accordance with the City of Toronto guidelines?
Are the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment good planning and in the public interest?

Implementation

If the requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments are approved by the Tribunal, in whole or in part, should the Tribunal’s final order be withheld until it has been advised by the City Solicitor that:
1. the final form and content of the draft Official Plan Amendment is to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review and the City Solicitor;
2. the final form and content of the draft Zoning By-law Amendment is to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review and the City Solicitor;
3. the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing issues a decision on Official Plan Amendment 537 related to the Keele-St. Clair Secondary Plan;
4. the owner has, at their sole cost and expense: i. submitted a revised Functional Servicing, Stormwater Management, and Hydrogeological Reports for review and acceptance to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water. The reports will determine whether the municipal water and fire flow, sanitary and storm sewer capacity can support the proposed development and whether upgrades or improvements of the existing municipal infrastructure are required; ii. entered into a financially secured agreement for the construction of any improvements to the municipal infrastructure, to the satisfaction of the City, should it be determined that upgrades and road improvements are required to support the development, according to the Transportation Impact Study accepted by the Executive Director, Development Review and the Functional Servicing Report accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, in consultation with the General Manager, Toronto Water;
  1. submitted a revised Transportation Impact Study and Transportation Demand Management Plan to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services;
  2. submitted a revised Rail Safety and Risk Mitigation Report including peer review by a third-party consultant, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
  3. submitted a revised Noise and Vibration Study including peer review by a third-party consultant, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
  4. submitted a phasing plan to demonstrate the order in which the various elements of development would be delivered, to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
  5. submitted a revised Draft Plan of Subdivision to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
  6. made revisions to meet the Toronto Green Standard requirements to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Development Review;
  7. submitted a revised Pedestrian Level Wind Study to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner, City Planning and Executive Director, Development Review;
  8. submitted a revised Arborist Report, Soil Volume Plan, and Tree Preservation Plan to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Environment, Climate and Forestry and,
  9. the Draft Plan of Subdivision and the associated conditions of the Draft Plan Approval are in a form and content acceptable to the Executive Director, Development Review, prepared in consultation with the City Solicitor and appropriate City divisions.
If the proposed development is approved in whole or in part, should the Tribunal Order be withheld until the Tribunal receives confirmation from the City Solicitor that a Holding provision (H) has been included in the final form of the site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment, not to be lifted until such time as the following conditions are satisfied:
1. Should it be determined that infrastructure upgrades are required to support the development according to the accepted Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report and/or the Transportation Impact Study, or until such time as the planned improvements identified in the St. Clair Avenue West Area Transportation Master Plan are delivered, a Holding Provision be included in the final form of the site-specific Zoning By-law Amendment; and the Holding Provision not be lifted until such a time as the owner has made satisfactory arrangements, including entering into appropriate agreement(s) with the City for the design and construction of any improvements to municipal infrastructure and the provision of financial securities to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, and the General Manager, Transportation Services.

i2 DEVELOPMENTS (OLD WESTON) INC.

Does the proposed development have appropriate regard for the matters of provincial interest as set out in Section 2 of the Planning Act, including as it relates to (f), (h), (n) and (r)?

Is the proposed development consistent with the policies of the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, in particular 2.2 (Housing), 2.3 (Settlement Areas and Settlement Area Boundary Expansions) and 2.4 (Strategic Growth Areas)?

Does the proposed development conform to the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan, in particular 3.1.1 (The Public Realm), 3.1.3 (Built Form), 3.1.4 (Built Form – Building Types), and 4.5 (Mixed Use Areas)?

Does the proposed development provide sufficient tower setbacks with respect to the approved redevelopment of 290 Old Weston Road to allow for appropriate tower separation distances?

Is the location of the proposed park on the subject property appropriate?

Has an appropriate analysis been undertaken regarding the location and timing of the dedication of the public roads and lanes, including those adjacent to 290 Old Weston Road (this includes the road that shall serve as an access point for both the proposed development and the approved redevelopment of 290 Old Weston Road)? Would it be appropriate for the timing of the dedication of these public roads and lanes be set out as conditions of zoning and/or subdivision approval?

What is the appropriate amount of non-residential space to be provided within the proposed development? What should the timing be for the provision of same?

Does the proposed development represent good planning?

i2 Developments (Old Weston) Inc. reserves the right to adopt issues advanced by other parties.

ATTACHMENT “4”

ORDER OF EVIDENCE

Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP
i2 Developments (Old Weston) Inc.
City of Toronto
Reply by Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP (if any)

ATTACHMENT “6”

DEFINITIONS

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 authorization 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.

Sequoia Stockyards GP Inc. and Sequoia Stockyards LP v. Toronto (City), 2025 CanLII 134086

Case Summary