Paul Grosman

The appellants appealed the 2022-2025 property assessments for a property in Hamilton, including supplementary assessments made under s. 34 of the Assessment Act.

The Board raised a preliminary question of law regarding the applicable valuation day for the s. 34 assessments.

Although all parties agreed the valuation day was January 1, 2016, the Board required legal submissions to determine if this was correct in law, departing from previous Board decisions that suggested a different valuation day applied to supplementary assessments.

The Board concluded that s. 19.2 of the Act prescribes the valuation day for all assessments for a taxation year, including s. 34 supplementary assessments.

Therefore, the valuation day for the s. 34 assessments is January 1, 2016.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's property assessment appeal for the 2024 taxation year on the basis of issue estoppel.

The subject property's 2016 current value assessment had previously been settled via Minutes of Settlement in a 2023 appeal brought by the City of Brampton, resulting in a final Board decision.

The appellant argued it did not participate in the 2023 appeal and did not receive the settlement documents.

The Assessment Review Board found that the three preconditions for issue estoppel were met and that the appellant was deemed to have received the mailed documents under the Board's Rules.

The Board exercised its discretion to apply issue estoppel, emphasizing the public interest in the finality of litigation, and dismissed the appeals.

The appellant appealed the 2022-2024 property assessment of a commercial shopping centre in Thunder Bay, arguing the returned value of $54,985,000 was too high.

MPAC sought a reduction to $54,322,000 based on the income approach, while the City sought an increase to $61,442,000.

The Assessment Review Board rejected the income and paired-sales approaches, finding the best evidence of current value was the average of two actual sales of the subject property from 2013 and 2021, adjusted for time.

The Board determined the correct current value to be $51,013,000 and found no evidence to support a further reduction for equitable assessment.

The City of Vaughan brought a motion to dismiss Canuck Properties Ltd.'s property assessment appeals for the 2022-2024 taxation years on the grounds of issue estoppel and abuse of process.

The City argued that the same issues had been decided in a prior appeal proceeding for the 2017-2020 taxation years, which was settled by the tenant without Canuck's active participation.

The Assessment Review Board found that while the strict requirements for issue estoppel were met, it would be a real injustice to apply the doctrine because Canuck was never served with a Statement of Issues in the prior proceeding, constituting an incurable procedural deficiency.

The Board also declined to dismiss the appeals for abuse of process, finding that preventing relitigation would condone a breach of procedural fairness.

The motion was dismissed.

The requesting party, Riocan Holdings (Hamilton) Inc., brought a motion for an order requiring the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) to disclose unredacted third-party property information and source documents relied upon in MPAC's expert report.

Notice was served on the third-party property owners, and three objected.

The Assessment Review Board found that one owner's competitive concerns were mitigated by the requesting party's confidentiality undertaking, and the other two owners failed to provide sufficient submissions regarding prejudice.

The Board granted the request and ordered MPAC to disclose the requested documents subject to statutory confidentiality terms.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's property assessment appeals for the 2022 to 2024 taxation years based on issue estoppel.

The appellant had previously settled appeals for the 2017 to 2018 taxation years, establishing the current value assessment for the subject property as of January 1, 2016.

The Board found that the three preconditions for issue estoppel were met, as the same question was being raised, the prior decision was final, and the parties were identical.

Relying on a recent identical decision involving the same appellant, the Board exercised its discretion to apply issue estoppel and dismissed the appeals.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's property assessment appeals for the 2022 to 2024 taxation years based on issue estoppel.

The appellant had previously appealed the assessments for the 2017 to 2021 taxation years, which were settled and finalized by a Board decision.

The Board found that the current appeals raised the exact same question—the current value assessment of the subject property as of January 1, 2016—and that the previous decision was final and involved the same parties.

Finding no injustice in applying the doctrine, the Board granted the motion and dismissed the appeals.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's property assessment appeals for the 2022 to 2024 taxation years based on issue estoppel.

The appellant had previously appealed the 2017 to 2019 assessments for the same property, which were settled and finalized by the Board.

The Board found that the current appeals sought to relitigate the same issue—the current value assessment of the property as of January 1, 2016.

Concluding that the three preconditions for issue estoppel were met and that no injustice would result, the Board granted the motion and dismissed the appeals.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's property assessment appeals for the 2023 and 2024 taxation years on the basis of issue estoppel.

The appellant argued that the current value of the subject property was inequitable compared to similar lands.

The Assessment Review Board found that the issue of equitable adjustment had already been finally determined in a prior appeal proceeding for the 2017-2020 taxation years.

Applying recent Divisional Court jurisprudence, the Board held that all requirements for issue estoppel were met and declined to exercise its discretion to hear the appeals.

The motion was granted and the appeals were dismissed.

The City of Ottawa brought a motion to dismiss the appellant's property assessment appeals for the 2022 to 2024 taxation years on the basis of issue estoppel.

The appellant had previously settled appeals for the 2017 to 2020 taxation years, agreeing to an assessed value.

In the current appeals, the appellant did not dispute the assessed value but sought a further reduction under s. 44(3)(b) of the Assessment Act.

The Assessment Review Board found that the issue of equitable reduction was necessarily before the Board in the prior proceedings and applied issue estoppel, dismissing the appeals.

The appellant appealed the City of Guelph's denial of vacant unit rebate applications for five properties for the 2014 taxation year.

The City rejected the applications on the basis that they were not made by the statutory deadline of February 28, 2015.

The Assessment Review Board found that the applications were mailed on February 25, 2015, and interpreted the word 'made' in section 364(2)(5) of the Municipal Act to mean the date the applications were posted.

The Board determined the applications were made within the statutory time limit and referred them back to the City to determine the rebate amounts.