6 total
Motion to dismiss assessment appeal denied; notice properly served on former owner listed on assessment roll.
The current owner of the subject property brought a motion to dismiss the municipality's assessment appeal, arguing that the municipality failed to provide proper notice under section 40(9) of the Assessment Act by mailing the notice of appeal to the former owner.
The former owner was incorrectly listed on the returned assessment roll due to the timing of the sale.
The Assessment Review Board dismissed the motion, finding that section 40(9) requires notice to be sent to the person liable to assessment as shown on the assessment roll.
The Board held that the assessment roll is binding until corrected, and the municipality complied with the statutory requirements by serving the person named on the roll within the limitation period.
Landfill gas electricity generation facility excluded from property assessment as it constitutes an environmental control activity.
The appellants appealed a decision of the Assessment Review Board which determined that the current value assessment of a landfill site should exclude the value of a facility used to generate electricity from landfill gas.
The appellants argued the facility was a commercial activity, not used exclusively for landfilling activities.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the generation of electricity from landfill gas is an environmental control activity required by the site's environmental compliance approval, and thus falls within the definition of landfilling activities under O. Reg. 282/98.
Motion for disclosure granted; non-disclosure agreement not required as existing protections deemed adequate.
MPAC brought a motion for disclosure of rent rolls, operating statements, and other financial information from the appellant in a property assessment appeal concerning a premium outlet mall.
The appellant agreed to disclose information for 2015-2017 on the condition that MPAC execute a non-disclosure agreement, but opposed disclosure for 2018 and 2019.
The Assessment Review Board held that a non-disclosure agreement was not required, as existing statutory and common law protections were adequate.
The Board also granted MPAC's disclosure requests for 2018 and 2019, finding the information relevant to valuing new additions to the property and proportionate to the issues in dispute.
Landfill assessment under section 43.2 excludes the value of remaining landfilling capacity.
The Township of Warwick appealed the property assessment of an active private landfill owned by Waste Management of Canada Corporation.
The central issue was whether the valuation of the landfill under section 43.2 of O. Reg. 282/98 should include the market value of its remaining landfilling capacity.
The Assessment Review Board held that section 43.2 requires the exclusion of value attributed to the remaining landfilling capacity, as the regulation mandates valuing the land as if it were vacant industrial land.
The Board set the current value of the property at $6,387,000 for the 2019, 2020, and 2021 taxation years and found no equity adjustment was required.
Landfill assessment under section 43.2 of O. Reg. 282/98 excludes the value of remaining landfilling capacity.
The Township of Warwick appealed the MPAC assessment of an active private landfill owned by Waste Management of Canada Corporation for the 2019, 2020, and 2021 taxation years.
The central issue was whether section 43.2 of O. Reg. 282/98 requires the valuation of the landfill as 'vacant industrial land' to include the market value of its remaining landfilling capacity.
The Assessment Review Board held that section 43.2 establishes a special valuation regime that ousts the general market value approach under section 19(1) of the Assessment Act.
Consequently, the value of the remaining landfilling capacity must be excluded.
The Board determined the correct current value of the property to be $6,387,000 and found no basis for an equity adjustment.
Landfill gas to energy facility excluded from property valuation as a gas collection system.
The appellant appealed the property tax assessment of a landfilling site, arguing that a landfill gas to energy facility should be excluded from the land's valuation.
The Assessment Review Board found that the facility, which generates electricity from methane gas, is an environmental control activity used exclusively for landfilling activities.
The Board also determined the facility qualifies as a 'gas collection system' under O. Reg. 282/98.
Consequently, the facility was excluded from the valuation, and the property's current value was set at $1,105,000.
