Sarah Spitz

The applicant sought judicial review to quash a zoning by-law amendment that permitted a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) on rural lands, alleging the City of Ottawa acted in bad faith and failed to follow required procedures.

The Divisional Court granted the applicant public interest standing and exercised its discretion to hear the application despite the availability of an alternative statutory remedy.

On the merits, the court dismissed the application, finding no evidence of bad faith or procedural unfairness in the City's sequencing of approvals, suspension of procedural rules, or reliance on the submitted technical studies.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent to govern the conduct of a five-week hearing regarding a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The order establishes deadlines for documentary discovery, witness statements, expert reports, and other pre-hearing steps leading up to the hearing scheduled to commence on April 6, 2027.

Metrolinx sought approval to expropriate surface and subsurface portions of land owned by 690981 Ontario Limited (Crossways) to construct an underground pedestrian tunnel connecting the GO/UP station and the Dundas West TTC station.

Crossways requested a Hearing of Necessity, raising concerns about safety, fire protection, and the scope of the temporary easement.

The Ontario Land Tribunal found that the proposed expropriations were fair, sound, and reasonably necessary to meet the growing demands for public transit.

The Tribunal approved the expropriations, including the temporary access easement, subject to Metrolinx coordinating all works with Crossways and adhering to its safety commitments.

The applicant appealed the City's failure to make a decision on Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments, as well as applications under the Ontario Heritage Act, to permit a two-tower residential development at 123 Wynford Drive.

The site contains a designated heritage building originally designed by Raymond Moriyama for the Japanese Canadian Cultural Centre.

The applicant proposed a conservation strategy involving the temporary relocation, partial disassembly, and reassembly of the heritage building to form the podium of one of the towers.

The City and the National Association of Japanese Canadians opposed the development, arguing it would destroy the site's cultural heritage value.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, preferring the applicant's expert evidence that the development represents good planning, provides needed housing intensification near transit, and appropriately conserves the heritage attributes through the proposed dismantling and reassembly strategy.

A Case Management Conference was held to establish a procedural order and schedule hearing dates for a claim for compensation under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal scheduled a 10-day video hearing to commence on November 30, 2026, and issued a Procedural Order governing the pre-hearing steps, including documentary discovery, witness statements, and expert reports.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent to govern the pre-hearing steps and the 19-day hearing of consolidated claims for expropriation compensation brought by Bendale Parkway Limited, Mirmor Investments Limited, and Shoppers Drug Mart Inc. against Metrolinx.

The order establishes a timetable for pleadings, discovery, mediation, and the exchange of expert evidence.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding three applications for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the Scarborough Subway Extension Project.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal ordered that the applications brought by the fee simple owners and a former tenant be consolidated and heard together.

A four-week hearing on the merits was scheduled for May and June 2026.

The claimants brought a motion seeking post-judgment interest on their settled costs and an order that the respondent was not entitled to set off costs awarded to it by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada.

The Tribunal found that because the parties had settled the costs without a Tribunal order, post-judgment interest under section 129 of the Courts of Justice Act did not accrue.

Furthermore, the Tribunal held that it lacked jurisdiction to vary or relieve the claimants from costs orders made by appellate courts.

The motion was dismissed.

The applicant appealed the Town's Committee of Adjustment decision refusing applications for provisional consent and minor variances to sever a lot and build two single-detached dwellings.

The Tribunal found the proposal consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Official Plan.

The Tribunal accepted expert planning evidence that the requested variances for lot frontage, area, coverage, and height met the four-part test under the Planning Act, noting the absence of evidence demonstrating adverse impacts.

The appeals were allowed, and the consent and variances were approved subject to conditions.

The parties requested on consent to amend the procedural order to change the hearing start date from June 15, 2025, to November 24, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal granted the request and ordered the hearing to commence on the new date, with all other aspects of the procedural order remaining the same.

The claimants sought compensation under the Expropriations Act for the expropriation of their properties by Metrolinx for the Scarborough Subway Extension Project.

At the first Case Management Conference, new counsel for the claimants requested an adjournment to familiarize themselves with the proceedings after previous counsel withdrew due to a conflict of interest.

The respondent consented to the adjournment, noting that a third related application was expected to be filed and should be heard together.

The Tribunal granted the adjournment and scheduled the continuation of the Case Management Conference for January 22, 2025.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a case management conference regarding four applications for compensation under the Expropriations Act arising from the expropriation of a multi-unit property for the Ontario Line Subway Project.

The Tribunal ordered that the applications be heard together and issued a procedural order scheduling a 15-day video hearing on the merits for September 2025.

The Regional Municipality of York brought a motion for directions regarding the procedural order in an expropriation compensation claim.

The parties disputed the timing of expert report exchanges and the delivery of appraisal reports prior to examinations for discovery.

At the hearing, the parties resolved the disputes on consent, agreeing to simultaneous exchange of expert reports and adherence to Rule 26.21 for the delivery of appraisal reports.

The Tribunal scheduled a nine-day hearing and issued the agreed-upon procedural order.

The appellant appealed a Committee of Adjustment decision refusing variances for a proposed residential dwelling.

Prior to the hearing, the appellant revised the application to seek only one variance for an increase in maximum lot coverage from 30 percent to 32 percent.

The Toronto Local Appeal Body found that the appellant failed to provide sufficient planning evidence to demonstrate that the requested variance maintained the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, was desirable for the appropriate development of the land, or was minor in nature.

The appeal was dismissed and the variance was not authorized.

Following a successful claim for injurious affection where no land was taken, the claimant sought costs under section 32(1) of the Expropriations Act.

The respondent conceded liability for costs but disputed the reasonableness of several specific items, including costs for a change of counsel, prior counsel assessment, and various motions.

The Tribunal applied the principle that expropriation costs are awarded on a full indemnity basis subject to reasonableness.

The Tribunal disallowed costs related to the change of counsel and assessment, reduced costs for bill preparation and cost recovery, but allowed the majority of the disputed motion and consulting costs.

The respondent was ordered to pay $355,603.68 in costs plus $7,500 for the costs motion.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a third Case Management Conference regarding an appeal by Mattamy (Eglinton) Limited for the City of Toronto's failure to make a decision on a proposed Plan of Subdivision.

The parties requested a further CMC in the fall to allow time for an ongoing Environmental Assessment in the Golden Mile area to unfold.

The Tribunal agreed and scheduled a fourth CMC for October 31, 2024.

A Case Management Conference was held to organize the hearing of a claim for compensation brought by the claimant against the respondent under the Expropriations Act.

The Tribunal approved the revised Procedural Order submitted by the parties and scheduled a five-day Merit Hearing to commence on November 4, 2024, by video.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order on consent of the parties to govern the proceedings leading up to a 10-day hearing scheduled to commence on June 16, 2025, regarding a land compensation claim under the Expropriations Act.

At a pre-hearing conference for a compensation claim under the Expropriations Act, the parties advised the Tribunal that they had narrowed the issues and reduced the required hearing time to three and one-half days.

The parties also requested a schedule adjustment to accommodate the Passover holiday.

The Tribunal granted the requests and issued a revised procedural order.

The Ontario Land Tribunal held a Case Management Conference regarding a land compensation claim under the Expropriations Act.

The parties consented to a revised hearing date of October 28, 2024, and submitted a proposed revised Procedural Order.

The Tribunal ordered that the appended Procedural Order govern the conduct of the proceeding.